U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air and Radiation
Fiscal Year 2011
Final
National Program & Grant Guidance
May 7, 2010
-------
Contents
Executive Summary 1
1. Program Office 1
2. Purpose and Organization of Document 1
3. Collaboration with Co-Regulators 1
4. National Priorities 2
5. Priorities for Regional Offices 2
6. Cross-agency Priorities 3
7. State and Tribal Assistance Grants 8
8. Implementation Strategies 8
9. Performance Measures 9
10.Tracking Progress 9
Healthier Outdoor Air 10
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs 11
Federal Stationary Source Regulations 16
Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and Certifications 17
Federal Support for Air Quality Management 19
State and Local Air Quality Management 30
Tribal Air Quality Management 40
Climate Protection 46
Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule 46
Proposed PSD and Title V GHG Tailoring Rule 48
Vehicle GHG Standards 48
Renewable Fuel Standard Program 49
Potential New Source Performance Standards 50
Clean Automotive Technology 50
Voluntary Climate Protection Programs 51
Stratospheric Ozone 54
Domestic Programs
55
Multilateral Fund 55
Indoor Environments 56
Asthma 57
Radon
57
Radiation Protection 60
Radiation Protection 60
Radiation Emergency Response Preparedness 62
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and Recovery 63
Appendix A Performance Measures (including State Grant Performance Measures)
Appendix B Effective Utilization and Distribution of STAG Funds
Appendix C Ambient Monitoring
Appendix D Office of Air and Radiation 2010 Priorities
Appendix E Key Changes from 2010
Appendix F Program Contacts (for questions or more information)
Appendix G Draft Work Plan for Environmental Justice
Appendix H Responses to Comments
-------
Executive Summary
1. Program Office. Office of Air and Radiation (OAR).
2. Purpose and Organization of Document
This document describes operational air and radiation program implementation priorities and
milestones for Fiscal Year (FY) 2011, and provides information and guidance on FY 2011 state,
local, and tribal assistance grants. The guidance consists of this Executive Summary, five
topical chapters covering OAR's main areas of concern (Healthier Outdoor Air, Climate
Protection, Stratospheric Ozone, Indoor Environments, and Radiation Protection), and several
appendices. Each topical chapter provides an overview of the program and the key
programmatic activities expected to be undertaken in FY 2011 by headquarters, regions, states,
local agencies, and tribes, as applicable.
A substantial change for this guidance is that much of the information on state and tribal
assistance grants is now integrated into the main body of the document rather than being in a
separate appendix. Updates on new grant initiatives, areas of changing emphasis, and associated
program support are discussed under the "State and Tribal Assistance Grants" section of the
Executive Summary and in the Outdoor Air chapter under the "State and Local Air Quality
Management" subheading. Separate appendices continue to be provided for:
• Performance measures for EPA Regions and co-implementors (Appendix A)
• Policies and procedures for effective grants management and a preliminary region-by-
region national allocation (Appendix B)
• More detailed information on changes in ambient monitoring (Appendix C)
The final guidance reflects consideration of the numerous stakeholder comments received
during the comment period. Appendix H summarizes OAR's responses to specific questions and
comments, including those on funding, received from partners and stakeholders.
3. Collaboration with Co-Regulators. Protection of public health and the nation's air
resources is a partnership among federal, state, local, and tribal agencies, and cannot be
accomplished effectively without constructive, ongoing relationships and regular open
communication. In February 2010, representatives of OAR and the National Association of
Clean Air Agencies (NACAA) met and discussed a range of priority issues and committed to
focus on a number of areas of particular concern. These included adequacy of funding and the
effective use of available resources, greenhouse gas program implementation, state air quality
implementation plan reforms, and multi-pollutant and sector based approaches to air pollution
control. Many of these discussions are still ongoing and the most recent developments may not
be reflected in this guidance.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 1 of 63
-------
4. OAR National Priorities. In a January 2010 memorandum,1 Administrator Jackson
identified seven key priorities to focus the work of the Agency. OAR Assistant Administrator
(AA) Gina McCarthy subsequently distributed a document describing the specific ways that
OAR would direct energy and resources, and the priority activities OAR would carry out, to
support the Administrator's priorities.2 Specific actions related to these priorities are discussed
in the topical chapters of this document. The priority areas of focus are:
• Reduce GHGs
• Complete and Implement Critical Regulatory Actions to Improve Outdoor Air Quality
• Elevate the Importance of Indoor Air Quality
• Work for Healthier Communities and Environmental Justice
• Build Strong Partnerships with States, Tribes, and Local Agencies
5. Priorities for Regional Offices. OAR works with and through EPA's 10 Regional Offices,
who in turn work with state, local, and tribal governments, communities, and others, to
implement OAR's national priorities and programs. The Regional Offices also work with those
entities, and others, to jointly plan and set priorities to address unique regional or local
environmental priorities, issues, conditions, and concerns. OAR recognizes that regions have
their own region-specific priorities and strategies, and strives to provide regions with the
programmatic flexibility they need to address their priorities as well as the OAR national
priorities. For FY 201 1, the OAR national priorities for regions are:
Greenhouse Gases. Assist in implementing the GHG mandatory reporting rule, and work
with states and local agencies to build their capacity to implement the proposed Prevention
of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Title V Tailoring Rule. Continue to promote and
expand awareness and encourage participation in voluntary GHG reduction programs and
activities.
Ozone, Lead, PM^, and Regional Haze. Act on State Implementation Plan (SIP)
submissions and redesignation requests including regional haze control strategy plans,
assist in designating areas for the revised lead standard and ozone standard, and begin
working with states on developing attainment plans for areas designated nonattainment for
ozone.
Clean Air Interstate Rule. Assist states with CAIR emissions monitoring and reporting.
Ambient Monitoring. Work with state and local agencies to implement the near-source
lead monitoring network; develop NO2 monitoring plans; provide assistance for changes in
201 1 ozone monitoring season, if required; communicate any required changes to each
state's ozone monitoring network for non-urban and lower population areas for inclusion
in annual monitoring network plans; ensure certification of 2010 data submitted to AQS
database by May 1, 201 1; and, ensure readiness of remaining required NCore monitoring,
such as PMio-2.5 mass, due to start on January 1, 201 1. Also, work with HQ and state and
1 Full document available at http://blog.epa.gov/administrator/2010/01/12/seven-priorities-for-epas-future/
2 Full document is included as Appendix D.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 2 of 63
-------
local agencies to expand community-based air toxics monitoring, particularly in
communities disproportionately impacted by air pollution.
Mobile Sources. Implement the National Clean Diesel Campaign, assist with and
comment on conformity determinations, process conformity-related SIP revisions, and
make determinations and act on mobile budgets at time of SIP processing.
Air Toxics. Delegate and provide assistance to co-regulators for section 111, section 112,
and section 129 standards; increase emphasis on implementing programs and activities that
contribute to reducing exposure to air toxics in areas that are experiencing disproportionate
impacts. Support the OAR/Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA)
community air toxics initiative in selected pilot areas.
Title V Permits. Work on overseeing state permitting activities, issuing PSD and Part 71
permits in Indian Country and on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), permitting the
pollution sources that remain to be addressed, and completing permit renewals.
Indoor Environments. Improve indoor air quality and increase the number of people
breathing healthier indoor air by working with state, local, tribal, and other stakeholders to
build community capacity to reduce asthma triggers, improve indoor air quality in schools,
and reduce radon exposure.
Radiation. Work with our national, international, state, tribal, and local government
partners, industry, environmental groups and the public to review, update or revise our
uranium regulations and older guidance. Continue to prepare for and respond to
radiological emergencies. Continue work with the regions to provide technical assistance,
outreach and education in the location of radioactive mine wastes that contaminate tribal
lands and water resources with radionuclides and heavy metals.
State, Local and Tribal Planning. Support multi-pollutant planning and efforts to reduce
emissions of all air pollutants, while addressing other considerations such as land use,
transportation, and energy.
6. Cross-Agency Priorities
Cutting Air Pollution in Communities
Environmental protection is community protection. OAR will pursue several initiatives
that focus on reducing air pollution in vulnerable communities and will work with OECA
and other EPA offices to address air pollution at the community scale.
OAR's recent experience in monitoring air toxics levels and risks at schools, and work in
several communities, make it evident that the public health and environmental impacts
associated with air toxics emissions occur largely at the local level. Further, existing
information suggests that such risks may disproportionately affect some vulnerable
subpopulations, such as schoolchildren. Consistent with the Administrator's commitment
to Congress to protect the public from toxic air pollution where they live, work, and play,
OAR and OECA will work together and with states and communities to identify if and
Final Guidance May?, 2010 3 of 63
-------
where air toxics pollution is occurring at unsafe levels, and will focus regulatory and non-
regulatory activities to reduce air toxics pollution within at-risk communities, and around
schools and other places where children and other sensitive populations may be exposed.
Consistent with this focus, OECA has established two air-related enforcement priorities
based on outreach to EPA programs and regions, states and tribal governments,
environmental advocacy groups, environmental justice groups, and the public: cutting
toxic air pollution in communities, and reducing air pollution from largest sources.
For air toxics, OECA will: (1) focus on excess emissions caused by facilities' failure to
comply with leak detection and repair requirements and restrictions on flaring, and (2)
address excess emissions during start-up, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) events. For
large sources, OECA will focus on illegal emissions from facilities lacking NSR/PSD
permits. The benefits may be felt at a distance from the point of emission reduction, as a
result of transported air pollution. Targeting analyses will be done to identify where
emissions of criteria air pollutants are occurring and where communities may be
disproportionately exposed to criteria pollutants. For FY 2011-2013, OECA is targeting
four industrial sectors: coal-fired electric utilities, cement manufacturing facilities,
sulfuric and nitric acid manufacturing facilities, and glass manufacturing facilities.
OAR will be working on a number of large stationary source rules that will result in
greatly reduced air emissions that affect vulnerable communities. In addition, EPA will
undertake rulemaking to respond to the mandate issued by the D.C. Circuit Court of
Appeals in October 2009 vacating language in the General Provisions that govern the
Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) program. The ruling had impacts on
whether sources are exempt from MACT compliance during periods of SSM. Emissions
can be large during SSM events, and impacts on nearby communities can be significant.
EPA is working to address the issue and reduce the risks posed by these emissions.
Children's Environmental Health
Children's environmental health should be an intrinsic part of decision-making at every
level of the Agency. EPA must build on existing activities and accomplishments so that
children's health protection is not just a consideration in Agency decision-making, but a
driving force in our decisions. We must use a variety of approaches to protect children
from environmental health hazards, including regulation, implementation of community-
based programs, research, and outreach. At the same time, we must periodically evaluate
our performance to ensure that we are making progress towards this goal. In all of our
efforts, regions, states, and tribes should identify and assess environmental health risks that
may disproportionately affect children throughout their life stages, including fetal
development, infancy, childhood, and adolescence.
Regional programs must ensure that policies, programs, activities, and standards address
disproportionate risks to children. Within each region is a Children's Health Coordinator
who serves as a resource to assist offices and divisions with children's environmental
health programs and planning. The Regional Children's Health Coordinator is also a
liaison between the Region and the Office of Children's Health Protection and
Final Guidance May?, 2010 4 of 63
-------
Environmental Education at Headquarters. Actions regions can take in FY 2011 to expand
efforts to protect children's environmental health include:
• Reviewing existing ACS measures that are specific to or refer to children's health
to determine if these can be modified or supplemented to better report outcomes
and results in children's environmental health for inclusion in future planning and
reporting agreements;
• Formulating discussions and agenda topics on children's health outcomes for EPA
programs in national meetings, such as division directors meetings;
• Implementing the Agency's Children's Environmental Health Guidance for Human
Health Risk Assessments (http://epa.gov/risk/guidance.htm);
• Sponsoring joint meetings with counterparts in state and tribal environmental
departments and health departments to facilitate coordinated actions to better
protect children's environmental health; and,
• Developing regional strategies to focus on addressing critical children's health
issues unique to the region.
Environmental Justice
One of priorities identified in the Administrator's January 2010 memorandum3 is to
expand the conversation on environmentalism and work for environmental justice. OAR
has long been committed to addressing environmental justice issues, and in 1992 we
developed our first Environmental Justice Action Plan. OAR's efforts have been
consistent with the Agency's environmental justice policies, and are described in the OAR
FY 2009 Environmental Justice Action Plan4 (currently being updated).
OAR's environmental justice priorities are highlighted in Appendix D "Office of Air and
Radiation 2010 Priorities," and specific environmental justice activities to be conducted
are described in the Healthier Outdoor Air and Indoor Environments chapters of this
guidance. As we implement our programs, we will connect with those who have been
historically underrepresented in EPA decision-making, including communities of color,
Native Americans, the poor, and people disproportionately impacted by pollution, and our
programs and policies will reflect our consideration of the burdens that pollution has
placed on vulnerable subpopulations. At the same time, we will strengthen our internal
mechanisms to assure adequate funding for critical projects, including those that focus on
incorporating environmental justice into our work, and accountability for improving air
quality in areas that are disproportionately impacted by air pollution.
In addition, OAR will work with the regions to help educate and raise awareness with
states on opportunities to address environmental justice, and promote the use of an
3 Full document available at http://blog.epa.gov/administrator/2010/01/12/seven-priorities-for-epas-future/
4 Full document available at: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/reports/actionplans/ei/
Final Guidance May?, 2010 5 of 63
-------
integrated problem solving strategy in the regional EJ Showcase Communities. This
strategy engages all appropriate EPA programs as well as state, local, tribal and non-
government partners. The strategy also coordinates the use of all appropriate tools to
address the issues identified in the Showcase Communities, including meaningful
community involvement, outreach and education, environmental research, risk assessment,
monitoring and modeling, alternate dispute resolution, permitting and regulatory tools, as
well as many voluntary efforts.
The Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) is the national program
manager for EPA's Environmental Justice Program. OECA has recently published its
goals and national enforcement initiatives for FY 2011-2013.5 For FY 2011, OAR and
OECA will be working together to reduce toxic air pollution in communities that are
disproportionately affected by pollution.
In another recent development, the Office of Environmental Justice within OECA has
drafted a framework to organize the Agency's environmental justice work and support the
Administrator's environmental justice priority. The framework consists of a Draft Work
Plan with four goals supported by a series of objectives. The complete Draft Work Plan,
including goals and objectives, is included as Appendix G. Where specific environmental
justice activities are described in the Healthier Outdoor Air and Indoor Environments
chapters of this guidance, we have included a reference to indicate which of the draft goals
the stated activity supports.
Transboundary Programs
Great Lakes Air Deposition (GLAD) Program
The goal of EPA's Great Lakes program is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical
and biological integrity of the Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem, as required by the Great
Lakes Water Quality Agreement and the Clean Water Act. Extensive work of the Great
Lakes Interagency Task Force and its wide variety of stakeholders and non-governmental
partners culminated in the 2005 Great Lakes Regional Collaboration Strategy (GLRC
Strategy). In 2009, the President announced a new Great Lakes Restoration Initiative,
committing the Federal government to significantly advance protection and restoration of
the Great Lakes.
The Great Lakes Air Deposition (GLAD) program is a portion of this effort and is
coordinated by the Great Lakes Commission to address the deposition of toxic pollutants
and to promote coordinate efforts to reduce such deposition and the resulting adverse
impacts on human and wildlife health. The program, which also supports the Great Lakes
Bi-National Air Toxics Strategy with Canada, supports scientific research, information
gathering and collaboration among policy makers. The GLAD program shares STAG
resources among the eight Great Lakes States: Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota, Michigan,
New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
5 Available at http://www.epa.gov/compliance/data/plaiuiing/initiatives/goals.html
Final Guidance May?, 2010 6 of 63
-------
Funds are awarded under the CAA §105 and are provided to the states via their categorical
air program grant or as an air work plan element in a performance partnership grant. All
the GLAD funding is used to address the deposition of persistent bioaccumulative toxics
(PBTs) in the waterways of the Great Lakes Region. This effort includes, but is not
limited to, outputs such as PBT air monitoring, source characterization, source allocation,
and source reduction efforts. In FY2010, the majority of funding was targeted for the
development of a total maximum daily load standard (TMDL) for mercury to address
waterways impaired by air sources. Certain states plan to address PBTs by targeting a
specific source, such as open burning. In FY2011, it is expected that many states will
continue to address mercury-impaired waters with implementation of their TMDLs as their
desired outcome. For more information on the program, please contact Erin Newman in
Region 5 (312-886-4587).
US-Mexico Border Air Program
Under the the 27-year old La Paz Agreement between the U.S. and Mexico, EPA and its
Mexican counterpart, SEMARNAT, have established a bi-national program - Border 2012
- that focuses on cleaning the environment, protrecting the public health, and ensuring
emergency preparedness for the 12 million people who live along the U.S.-Mexico border.
The program supports the initiatives of the affected state, local and multi-jurisdictional
agencies on both sides of the border and uses regional workgroups, task forces, and policy
forums to develop and implement pollution reduction strategies. In encouraging local and
grass-roots strategies, the Border 2012 Program empowers a larger number of state, local,
tribal entities (also working with academics and NGOs) to become active participants in
border air quality improvements.
For example, OAR and SEMARNAT lead the Border 2012 Air Policy Forum, established
to employ a collaborative, stakeholder-driven approach to develop strategies for
cooperative and sustainable air emissions reduction efforts along the border. The Air
Policy Forum has developed an integrated, border-wide air quality strategy, to guide
emissions reduction projects taking place in the border region. This includes a new
border-wide objective and reduction strategy for GHGs that lays the path for baseline
development, climate action planning, energy efficiency, and other related border projects.
Air Policy Forum members additionally advise EPA and Mexico's SEMARNAT on
potential strategic funding needs and opportunities.
EPA activities fall into three primary areas: (1) public outreach and education using
Border 2012 task forces and work groups with a growing focus on GHGs; (2) the
enhancement of scientific knowledge including emissions inventories with a focus on
GHGs and air quality monitoring; and (3) the support of mobile source, stationary source
and/or GHG projects that deliver tangible emission reductions and that may also promote
border energy conservation, sustainability, or renewable energy efforts. For more
information on the Border 2012 Program please contact: Ruben Casso in Region 6 (214-
665-6763); and in Region 9, Christine Vineyard (415-947-4125) or Andrew Steckel (415-
947-4115).
Final Guidance May?, 2010 7 of 63
-------
Use of the National Environmental Information Exchange Network
In a July 2009 memorandum, Administrator Jackson made enhanced use of the National
Environmental Information Exchange Network a part of her strategic vision for the
Agency. She wrote in response to a unanimous request from the Environmental Council of
the States that she intended "the Agency to work with the states to set an aggressive
timetable for completing the transition to the Exchange Network (EN) for regulatory and
national system reporting...." She directed the National Program Managers (NPMs) to
work to achieve the vision of the Network as "the preferred way EPA, states, tribes, and
others share and exchange data." She added "I look forward to reviewing our progress
toward achieving this goal...." In response to this direction from the Administrator, OAR
places a high priority on increasing the use the EN for the transmission of air quality
measurement data from states, tribes, and localities to EPA. Specific actions are discussed
in the Healthier Outdoor Air chapter under the State and Local Air Quality Management
subheading.
7. State and Tribal Assistance Grants
State, local, tribal, and multi-jurisdictional agencies are essential in the development and
implementation of programs for preventing and controlling air pollution and for implementing
the NAAQS to protect the public health and environment.
Congress appropriates grant assistance and associated program support for these co-
implementors under the Agency's State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG) appropriation.
Eligible entities are defined by statute, budget request, and appropriation. Funds for continuing
air programs are awarded to state, local, and tribal air pollution control agencies using Section
105 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and require a recipient cost share. Section 103 provides 100%
federal funding to eligible entities to conduct studies, investigations, experiments, surveys,
demonstrations, training, and certain forms of research, on the nature, prevention, causes, and
effects of air pollution. Section 106, which also require a recipient match, provides EPA with
the authority to fund interstate air pollution control agencies and including interstate transport
commissions, to develop or carry out plans for designated air quality control regions. Beyond
the Clean Air Act, significant funds are also provided under Sections 791-797 of the 2005
Energy Policy Act for the support of programs to reduce diesel emissions.
For FY 2011, the Agency's budget request includes a significant increase in STAG funds to
assist states and local agencies with new as well as expanded core program responsibilities under
the Act. These include: the development and implementation of plans to address revised, more
protective NAAQS; ambient air monitoring provisions related to the new NAAQS; enhanced
capacity for agencies with approved or delegated responsibility for permitting large sources of
GHGs; and the continued characterization of air toxics problems and implementation of
measures to reduce their risks. While a modest increase has also been included for Tribal air
programs the Agency budget request also includes significant increases in other Tribal grant
programs under which air activity is eligible.
8. Implementation Strategies. EPA's array of tools to facilitate the implementation of the
Clean Air Act includes statutory and regulatory activities, market-based program activities,
Final Guidance May?, 2010 8 of 63
-------
partnership and community-based activities, and activities related to developing or implementing
innovative approaches. EPA works with co-implementors to assemble the mix of strategies and
activities most appropriate for their circumstances and prevailing environmental issues while
also addressing base program requirements. These strategies are described in the technical
sections of this document. EPA regions also work closely with states to identify opportunities
for enhanced work sharing, resource flexibility, and phased implementation of program
requirements. For example, Performance Partnership Grants (PPGs) and Performance
Partnership Agreements (PPAs) are two examples of the tools available to address workload
issues.
9. Performance Measures. OAR and the Regions have collaborated to develop and agree on
the performance measures listed in Appendix B. These were determined through discussions
among HQ and regional program experts and managers. The Agency's 2010-2015 Strategic
Plan is expected to be final on September 30, 2010. As we proceed with implementing the
Strategic Plan for FY 2011 it may be necessary to make adjustments to annual measures and
commitments specified in this Guidance to align with the new Strategic Plan. Additional
guidance will be provided as needed.
10. Tracking Progress. OAR tracks progress through existing monitoring, data reporting, and
information systems used by OAR, regions, and state, tribal, and local agencies, and through
EPA's performance measure database. We also track and discuss program progress via
conference calls, face-to-face meetings, and the exchange of written information.
++ End ++
Final Guidance May?, 2010 9 of 63
-------
Healthier Outdoor Air
EPA's strategy for achieving healthier outdoor air combines national, regional, and local
measures, reflecting different federal, state, tribal, and local government roles. States are
primarily responsible for maintaining and improving air quality and meeting national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS) established by EPA. State programs develop emission inventories;
operate and maintain air monitoring networks; implement construction and operating permit
programs for major and minor sources of criteria pollutants, toxics, and other regulated air
pollutants; perform air quality modeling; develop State Implementation Plans (SIPs) that lay out
control strategies for improving air quality and meeting NAAQS, and engage in public education
activities.
EPA assists states by providing technical guidance and financial assistance, issuing
regulations, and implementing programs designed to reduce pollution from the most widespread
and significant sources of air pollution: mobile sources, such as cars, trucks, buses, and
construction equipment; and stationary sources, such as power plants, oil refineries, chemical
plants, and dry cleaning operations. Interstate transport of pollutants—a problem no state can
solve on its own—makes a major contribution to air pollution problems. To address this issue,
EPA requires control of upwind sources that contribute to downwind problems in other states.
EPA has a trust responsibility to protect air quality in Indian country, but tribes may choose
to develop and implement their own air quality programs. In collaboration with EPA, tribes and
some states are working to fill the gap in air quality data/information on tribal lands, build tribal
capacity to administer air programs in Indian country, and establish mechanisms to work with
tribal governments on regulatory development and regional and national policy issues.
Our strategies for achieving healthier outdoor air are implemented through the following
programs:
• Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs
• Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and Certifications
• Federal Stationary Source Regulations
• Federal Support for Air Quality Management (including air toxics)
• State and Local Air Quality Management
• Tribal Air Quality Management
The first four programs are federally-implemented programs and the latter two are grant
programs that support state, tribal, and local air program implementation. All these programs
and their 2011 Priorities are described below. Although this document is organized to reflect
EPA's internal organization, there is substantial coordination between and among EPA HQ and
Regional offices. Where topics are repeated in this document, it is an indication of a cross-office
activity.
Final Guidance May 7, 2010 10 of 63
-------
CLEAN AIR ALLOWANCE TRADING PROGRAMS
This program includes development, implementation, and evaluation of federally-
administered emission reduction programs that include the trading of emissions allowances.
Trading programs help implement the NAAQS and reduce acid deposition, toxics deposition,
and regional haze. Pollutants include SO2, NOx, and, as a co-benefit of SO2 emission reduction
programs, mercury. Current operating programs include the Acid Rain Program authorized
under Title IV of the 1990 Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments, and the Clean Air Interstate Rule
(CAIR) seasonal and annual programs for interstate control of ozone and fine particle (PM25)
pollution.
Our overall strategy to promote more flexible and cost-effective pollution control and
achievement of environmental objectives includes the use of: rules with associated allowance
trading programs, an integrated utility strategy, program accountability, and program support to
co-implementors.
Rules and Allowance Trading Programs
• Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR): Continue implementation of this rule, consistent with
the decision by the D.C. Circuit Court in December 2008 to "allow CAIR to remain in
effect until it is replaced by a rule consistent with [the Court's July 11, 2008] opinion" so
as to "at least temporarily preserve the environmental values covered by CAIR."6 CAIR
enables states to use the proven cap-and-trade approach to achieve substantial reductions
in SO2 and NOx emissions. CAIR is a powerful component of EPA's plan to help over
450 counties in the eastern U.S. meet and maintain health-based, protective air quality
standards for ozone or PM2.5 by reducing transported pollution that drifts into a state
from sources in upwind states. All affected states are achieving the mandated reductions
primarily by controlling power plant emissions through an EPA-administered interstate
cap-and-trade program.
• Existing Programs: Implement, operate, and assess existing allowance trading programs,
including the programs established under CAIR.
• Transport Rule (CAIR Replacement): Propose the Transport Rule. EPA expects to
propose the Transport Rule in the Spring of 2010 and to finalize the rule in the Spring of
2011.
Integrated Utility Strategy
In the next few years, EPA, as a result of statutory requirements and court decisions, will
be promulgating a number of regulations that will affect the electric power industry: a
Transport Rule to replace CAIR, a rule to reduce air toxics from utilities, and New Source
Performance Standards for particulate matter, SO2, and NOx. The power sector is a sizeable
emitter of all of these pollutants. Preliminary analyses show that the public health benefits of
; U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, No. 05-1244, page 3 (decided December 23, 2008).
Final Guidance May?, 2010 11 of 63
-------
these rulemakings will likely be enormous. EPA will also be issuing new rules to protect
water quality, fish, and other aquatic wildlife. There will also be a need to integrate all of
these rules with any climate regulatory strategy since the power sector will be an important
element to any future climate strategy. The most cost-effective way to implement these
programs is through a coordinated set of actions for this industry. EPA's integrated approach
will assure that, to the extent allowed by statute, the various policies and regulations work
together in a coherent manner. It will allow companies to take advantage of co-control
opportunities and efficiencies in developing compliance strategies while promoting energy
security and a cleaner economy for the future.
Program Accountability
EPA will maintain an integrated assessment program that includes enhanced ambient and
deposition monitoring, surface water monitoring and chemistry analysis, efficiency
measures, and indicators to track health and environmental benefits, as called for in state of
science reports by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS)7 and the Heinz Center for
Science, Economics, and the Environment.8 The Clean Air Status and Trends Network
(CASTNET) is a long-term atmospheric deposition monitoring network established in 1987
that serves as the nation's primary source for atmospheric data on the dry deposition
component of acid deposition, rural ground-level ozone, and other forms of particulate and
gaseous air pollution. Surface water chemistry is a direct indicator of the effects of acid
deposition and enables assessment of how water bodies and aquatic ecosystems are
responding to reductions in sulfur and nitrogen emissions. The Temporally Integrated
Monitoring of Ecosystems (TIME) program, and the Long-Term Monitoring (LTM)
program, are designed to assess ecological response to acid deposition and the effectiveness
of implementation of the 1990 CAA Amendments in reducing the acidity of surface waters in
sensitive areas.
EPA tracks and assesses program progress each year, and publishes an annual report on
program compliance and environmental results (see US EPA, The NOx Budget Trading
Program: 2008 Highlights, EPA-430-R-09-026, October 2009 and also
http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progress/nbp08.html). EPA produced the 2008 annual
progress report as a four-part series of timely web-based publications: (1) Emission,
Compliance, and Market Data (May 2009); (2) Emission, Compliance, and Market Analysis
(July 2009); (3) Environmental Results (October 2009); and (4) Highlights (October 2009).
The third report segment contains measures, trends, and interpretive analyses of
environmental outcomes such as improvements in ground-level ozone, reductions in total
ambient nitrate concentrations, and decrease in areas with significant damage to ozone-
sensitive tree species based on CASTNET, TIME/LTM, and other monitoring network data.
7 National Research Council (NRC) of the National Academies, Air Quality Management in the United States (The
National Academies Press: 2004). The report recommends that EPA's implementation of air quality regulations
should place "more emphasis on results than process and should be designed to protect ecosystems as well as
people." (http://books.nap.edu/catalog.php7record id=10728)
8 The H. John Heinz III Center for Science, Economics, and the Environment. Indicators of Ecological Effects of
Air Quality. (Washington, DC: 2009).
Final Guidance May 7,2010 12 of 63
-------
Program Support to Co-Implementors
States that participate in the NOx Budget Trading Program under the NOx SIP Call, and
additional non-NOx Budget Program (NBP) states, will be transitioning into the CAIR
seasonal NOx program and will need to continue to contribute STAG resources to support
this effort. EPA provides support in the form of EPA FTE and contract resources in order to
operate the centralized allowance trading and emissions tracking systems that are utilized by
the participating states. Jurisdictions not affected or not participating in the trading programs
do not contribute their grant resources to support them. In 2008, there were 2,568 affected
units in the NBP: 2,249 electricity generating units (EGUs) and 319 industrial units.
Through a wide range of pollution control strategies and an active seasonal NOx allowance
trading market, emissions by the affected sources have continued to decrease. Emissions
during the 2008 ozone season were 8% below the 2008 emissions cap; 62% lower than in
2000 (before implementation of the NBP), and 76% lower than in 1990 (before
implementation of the 1990 CAA Amendments). The NBP trading program ended with the
2008 season: on January 1, 2009, EPA transferred 275,367 banked (unused) NBP allowance
into CAIR seasonal NOx allowance accounts. The volume of emissions data EPA is
processing under the CAIR seasonal program is 29% higher than the NBP, and the NBP
emissions data almost tripled in volume from 2003 through 2008.
EPA has continued to invest in several software development activities that contain or
lower program operating costs and, as a result, the processing costs per source are lower than
they would have been otherwise. Most notably, EPA completed a multi-year software re-
engineering project and deployed the Emissions Collection and Monitoring Plan System
(ECMPS) tool in FY 2009. ECPMS provides users with a single client tool for checking and
submitting data, direct access to EPA's database, and the ability to quality assure emissions
data prior to submission in FY 2010 and beyond. EPA administers the allowance trading
program; quality assures and processes reported emissions data, monitor certifications, and
unit operating data; performs end-of-season reconciliation of emissions with allowances, and
performs other administrative and assessment functions on behalf of the states through a
national contract and associated program support. Support for operating the CAIR seasonal
NOx trading program comes from grant funds of participating states in addition to EPA FTE
and contract resources. As shown Table 1, state shares for FY 2011 are based on the number
of affected sources per state times a unit cost per source (unit cost per source is down by over
40% from the early years of the NOx Budget Program). EPA will reconsider the approach
and funding allocation when transitioning to the 2012 budget year.
For more information contact Larry Kertcher at 202-343-9121 or Doris Price at 202-343-
9067 in the Clean Air Markets Division of GAP.
Final Guidance May 7, 2010 13 of 63
-------
Table 1 - Contribution to CAIR Seasonal NOX Trading Program by Region and State
Region/ State
Region 1
Connecticut
Massachusetts
Region 2
New Jersey
New York
Region 3
Delaware
Distrbt of Columbia
Ma ryla nd
Pennsylvania
Virginia
West Virgin! a
Region 4
Alabama
Florida
Kentucky
Mississippi
North Carolina
South Carolina
Tennessee
Region 5
Illinois
Indiana
Michigan
Ohio
Wisconsin
Region 6
Arkansas
Louisana
Region 7
Iowa
Missouri
Total Annual$
Units Affected by
CAIR Seasonal
P rogram
(FY 2007)
152
62
90
541
178
363
523
40
5
50
211
137
80
1,001
126
299
109
103
159
100
105
924
280
187
158
193
106
156
49
107
189
68
121
3,486
CAIR Seasonal
Program Cost*
FY 2008 - 201 1
$101,080
$41,230
$59,850
$359,765
$1 1 8,370
$241,395
$347,795
$26,600
$3,325
$33,250
$140,315
$91,105
$53,200
$665,665
$83,790
$198,835
$72,485
$68,495
$105,735
$66,500
$69,825
$609,856
$181,596
$124,355
$105,070
$128,345
$70,490
$103,740
$32,585
$71,155
$125,685
$45,220
$80,465
$2,318,190
* Processing cost per source calculated as $665 by OAP/CAMD.
In FY 2011, EPA will continue to assist states with CAIR implementation, especially with
activities related to allowance trading, emissions monitoring, and end-of-season reconciliation of
emissions and allowances. The initial compliance season for the CAIR-Ozone NOx control
program was May 1 - September 30, 2009, whereas the initial compliance year for the CAIR-
PM SC>2 control program began on January 1, 2010, and continues through the end of the first
quarter of FY2011 (December 31, 2010).
Final Guidance May 7, 2010
14 of 63
-------
FY 2011 Priorities: CAIR-Ozone (Seasonal NOx) Program
• HQ (CAMD), regions and states assist sources with monitor certifications, emissions
monitoring and reporting.
• HQ (CAMD) works with states to ensure proper allocations of allowances to source
accounts.
• HQ (CAMD) assists sources and other allowance account holders with allowance
transfers and recordation.
• HQ (CAMD) performs end-of-season reconciliation of emissions against allowances held
in source accounts, determines program compliance, and deducts penalty allowances for
any source not in compliance.
• HQ (CAMD) and states perform electronic and field audits of monitor certifications and
emissions reporting by sources.
• HQ (CAMD) assesses program, tracks performance against baselines and objectives, and
reports on emissions, compliance, market analyses, program performance, and
environmental results.
• HQ (CAMD) responds to comments by states, sources, and other program stakeholders
on Transport Rule and finalizes rule (target Spring 2011). Working with regions and
states, HQ (CAMD) plans transition from CAIR implementation to Transport Rule
implementation.
FY 2011 Priorities: CAIR-PM^s (SOi and Annual NOx Control ) Program
• HQ (CAMD) assists states and sources with the final quarter and closeout of the initial
compliance year for CAIR 862 control program, especially with emissions monitoring
and reporting and allowance market operations.
• HQ (CAMD) performs end-of-year reconciliation of SC>2 and NOx emissions in 2010
against allowances held in source accounts for the 862 and annual NOx control
programs, determines program compliance, and deducts penalty allowances for any
source not in compliance.
• HQ (CAMD) and states perform electronic and field audits of monitor certifications and
emissions reporting by sources.
• HQ (CAMD) assesses program, tracks performance against baselines and objectives, and
reports on emissions, compliance, market analyses, program performance, and
environmental results.
• HQ (CAMD) responds to comments by states, sources, and other program stakeholders
on proposed Clean Air Transport Rule; finalizes rule (target Spring 2011). Working with
regions and states, HQ (CAMD) plans transition from CAIR implementation to Transport
Rule implementation.
FY 2011 Priorities: Acid Rain Program
• HQ (CAMD) performs end-of-year reconciliation of SO2 emissions against allowances
held in facility accounts, determines compliance for annual NOx emission rates, and
performs electronic and field audits of monitor certifications and emissions reporting by
sources.
Final Guidance May 7, 2010 15 of 63
-------
Working with states, tribes, local agencies, Regional Planning Organizations, and other
partners in CASTNET, HQ (CAMD) develops and continues implementation of an
operations plan that will assure supportability over the next five years.
HQ (CAMD) completes transition of TIME/LTM surface water survey/network from
ORD to OAR. Both programs are operated cooperatively with partners in state agencies,
academic institutions, and other Federal agencies. HQ (CAMD) will award/manage
assistance agreements with partners.
HQ (CAMD) reports progress in reducing sulfur and nitrogen deposition and in reducing
the number of chronically-acidic water bodies in acid-sensitive regions, and SO2
emissions reduced.
FEDERAL STATIONARY SOURCE REGULATIONS
This program includes HQ activities related to: Maximum Achievable Control Technology
(MACT), combustion, and area source standard development; the stationary source Residual
Risk program; New Source Performance Standards (NSPS); and associated national guidance
and outreach information. The strategy is to develop regulations for sectors of stationary sources
that reduce multiple pollutants in the most efficient and cost-effective manner, while
simultaneously meeting multiple statutory obligations (MACT, Residual Risk, NSPS, etc.) and
addressing environmental justice and other concerns.
On October 16, 2009, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals issued a mandate vacating language in
the General Provisions governing the MACT program to control emissions of air toxics. That
language exempted sources from having to comply with the MACT standards during periods of
startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM). This vacatur immediately affected about 35 of
EPA's MACT standards that had referred to the General Provision rule for the exemption. An
additional 64 of EPA's MACT standards contain SSM exemptions within the rules themselves
and do not rely on the General Provisions exemptions. EPA plans to review these other MACT
standards and determine whether to remove the exemptions for periods of malfunction and to
clean up numerous other SSM-related provisions that were created to deal with the exemptions,
such as recordkeeping, reporting, testing, etc., within these standards. EPA will also determine
how to address startup and shutdown provisions within these 64 rules. We expect that if we
eliminate the malfunction exemptions from these rules, the environmental benefits to
communities located near facilities impacted by these rules will be significant. The Agency
intends to address the malfunctions issue in an integrated rulemaking, which will provide
assurance that facilities do not have incentives to routinely operate in a manner that allows
excess or uncontrolled emissions.
FY 2011 HO Priorities
• Propose and promulgate area source standards and residual risk standards according to
court ordered schedules.
• Promulgate National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for
Brick and Structural Clay.
• Promulgate NESHAP for Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers.
Final Guidance May 7,2010 16 of 63
-------
• Promulgate NESHAP: Defense Land Systems and Miscellaneous Equipment (Military
MACT).
• Propose and promulgate additional amendments to prior NESHAP/MACT Standards.
• Promulgate NESHAP for Industrial Boilers (major and area sources).
• Promulgate Remand Response and Amendments for Commercial and Industrial Solid
Waste Incinerators (CISWI).
• Promulgate Reconsideration of Stationary Combustion Turbines (Subpart KKKK).
• Promulgate NESHAP for Gold Mining Production Processes.
• Promulgate Response to Remand for Large Municipal Waste Combustion Units
(MWCs).
• Promulgate Response to Remand for Small Municipal Waste Combustion Units
(MWCs).
• Propose MACT for Utilities
• Propose NESHAP for Polyvinyl Chloride & Copolymers
• Promulgate NSPS for Portland Cement
• Develop revisions to NSPS for residential wood heaters
• NSPS Review Strategy - Proposal
• NSPS for Stationary Combustion Turbines (Reconsideration) - Final
• NSPS Compression Ignition Engines; Amendments - Final
• NSPS for Nitric Acid - Final
• Reconsideration of NSPS Electric, Utility, Industrial Steam Generating Units (Da, Db,
DC) - Proposal and Final
• Assess the potential development of GHG performance standards for new stationary
sources and guidelines for state regulation of existing sources, of certain sizes and within
certain industrial categories.
• Engage communities in rulemakings by expanding outreach and capacity building,
improving accessibility of decision makers, and improving transparency. (Supports
Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goal 1 (see Appendix G), and the OAR/OECA
air toxics initiative.)
FEDERAL VEHICLE AND FUELS STANDARDS AND CERTIFICATION
This program includes federal activities that support the development, implementation, and
evaluation of regulatory, market-based, and voluntary programs to reduce pollutant emissions
from mobile sources and fuels. Types of mobile sources addressed include: light-duty vehicles
and engines (cars, light-duty trucks, sport utility vehicles); heavy-duty engines (buses, large
trucks); nonroad vehicles/engines (construction, farm equipment, locomotives, marine); and
fuels (diesel, gasoline, renewable). The strategy for reducing emissions from mobile sources has
four elements.
• Clean Vehicles: Develop, implement and ensure compliance with stringent emission
standards for cars, light-duty trucks, sport utility vehicles, buses, large trucks, and
nonroad vehicles/engines.
Final Guidance May 7, 2010 17 of 63
-------
• Clean Fuels: Implement the renewable fuels program and cleaner gasoline and diesel
fuel regulations and develop reformulated gasoline, diesel fuel, and non-petroleum
alternatives.
• Clean Transportation Alternatives: Develop strategies to encourage transportation
alternatives that minimize emissions and address continued growth in vehicle miles
travelled.
• Clean Technology: Work with industry to certify low emission vehicles that use new
engine technologies, such as clean diesel, exhaust gas recirculation for diesel, new
catalyst technology, fuel cells, and hybrid-electric vehicles. Continue in-house
assessment and development of clean engine and fuel technologies and conduct
technology reviews to evaluate progress toward implementation of new vehicle and
engine standards.
Efforts related to greenhouse gases are discussed in the Climate Protection chapter.
FY2011 Priorities
Headquarters
• Develop program to further reduce criteria pollutant emissions from light-duty vehicles,
including program for cleaner fuel.
• Participate in international forums for ocean-going vessels and aircraft to coordinate and
advance emission controls from these sources.
• Begin development of proposal to control lead in aviation gasoline.
• Continue to develop and implement the Verify information management system that
centralizes emission-related and fuel economy data for all mobile source industries.
• Model fuel pathways not yet modeled and continue to develop and update lifecycle
models to allow assessment of new biofuel technologies and to evaluate feedstocks and
fuel pathways for future fuels and processes.
• Continue testing activities for fuel economy, Tier II testing, reformulated gasoline, future
fleets, alternative fuel vehicle conversion certifications, onboard diagnostics (OBD)
evaluations, certification audits, and recall programs.
• Review and approve approximately 5,000 vehicle and engine emissions certification
requests, including light-duty vehicles, heavy-duty diesel engines, nonroad engines,
marine engines, locomotives, and others.
• Ensure compliance with certification as well as in-use requirements for foreign-built
engines and equipment.
• Develop a rule establishing OBD requirements for nonroad engines.
• Continue to support implementation of existing vehicle, engine, and fuel regulations
including the Tier II light-duty (LD) vehicle program, the Mobile Sources Air Toxics
(MS AT) programs, the 2007-2010 Heavy-Duty (HD) Diesel standards, and the Non-
Road Diesel Tier 4 standards (and earlier non-road standards) in order to ensure the
successful delivery of cleaner vehicles, equipment, and fuel.
• Continue to evaluate and develop the new fuel economy labelling program and ongoing
assessment and analysis of emissions and fuel economy compliance data.
Final Guidance May 7, 2010 18 of 63
-------
• Conduct follow-up implementation work related to the mobile source air toxics
rulemaking in preparation for the 2011 program start date (work includes the assessment
of refineries' pre-compliance reports and early credit generation, in order to monitor the
viability of the benzene credit market).
• Continue implementation activities for the Locomotives/Marine rule finalized in 2008
and for small gasoline engine standards that began with model year 2009.
• Continue expansion and improvement of OTAQ' s transportation emission model,
MOVES, by incorporating new emission data collected under EPAct/EISA.
• Work with regions to assist states in developing, implementing, and transitioning I/M,
OBD, and fuel programs.
• As necessary, assist regions in processing conformity determinations made by
metropolitan planning organizations or state agencies.
• As necessary, assist regions in making adequacy determinations for identified mobile
source budgets in control strategy SIPs and maintenance plans submitted by states.
• Work with OAQPS on implementation and other guidance related to revisions of
NAAQS, especially with respect to I/M, Stage 2 and conformity.
Regions
• Assist states in preparing SIPs and developing, implementing, and transitioning mobile
source control strategies such as I/M, OBD, and state fuel programs.
• Assist states and local air quality and transportation agencies in future conformity
determinations as needed.
• Review and comment on transportation conformity determinations made by metropolitan
planning organizations or state agencies.
• Complete processing of transportation conformity SIPs submitted by states in FY 2011 as
necessary.
• Make adequacy/inadequacy determinations, as necessary, for identified mobile source
budgets included in control strategy SIPs and maintenance plans submitted by states
and/or approve/disapprove such budgets at the time of SIP processing.
• Work with OTAQ to provide training in the use of the MOVES model, and review
modeling results for state and local agencies.
• Work with states to develop creditable mobile source programs.
• Work with HQ on Requests for Proposals (RFPs) for the Diesel Emissions Reduction
Program which may include requests for projects that include working with financial
experts to implement innovative financing programs to deliver lower cost financing to
diesel truck and nonroad equipment buyers, many of whom are low-income and
minority-owner operations and businesses operating in environmental justice areas.
(Supports Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goal 2 (see Appendix G).)
FEDERAL SUPPORT FOR AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT
The federal support program includes Headquarters (HQ) and Regional Office non-financial
support to state, tribal, and local air pollution control agencies for the following programs:
NAAQS, regional haze, Title V, New Source Review (NSR), and Air Toxics.
Final Guidance May 7, 2010 19 of 63
-------
The NAAQS program includes: regular reviews of, revisions to, and establishing standards
for the criteria pollutants; developing associated national regulations, guidance and outreach
information for implementing these standards; and developing emission limiting regulations for
specific categories of sources. The federal support program also includes working with other
federal agencies to ensure a coordinated approach, and with international governments to address
sources of air pollutants that lie outside our borders but contribute to air quality degradation
within the United States. Federal financial support is addressed under "State and Local Air
Quality Management" and "Tribal Air Quality Management."
The regional haze program includes developing national rules and guidance for protecting
visibility in national parks and wilderness areas.
NSR is a CAA program that requires industrial facilities to install modern pollution control
equipment when they are built or when making a change that increases emissions significantly.
The program accomplishes this when owners or operators obtain permits limiting air emissions
before they begin construction. EPA issues permits on tribal lands, establishes permit program
rules, reviews state programs, and provides guidance on permitting decisions.
Large sources ("major" sources) of emissions and a limited number of smaller sources (called
"area" sources, "minor" sources, or "non-major" sources) are required by Title V of the CAA to
obtain an operating permit. Permits include pollution-control requirements from federal or state
regulations that apply to the source. Most of the permits are issued by state or local agencies
("part 70" permits); a small number are issued by EPA ("part 71" permits). EPA also establishes
rules, reviews state programs, and reviews citizen petitions.
The air toxics program includes non-financial support to state, tribal, and local air pollution
control agencies for: modeling, inventories, monitoring, assessments, strategy and program
development; community-based toxics programs; voluntary programs including those that reduce
inhalation risk and those that reduce deposition to water bodies and ecosystems; voluntary
efforts to address diesel emissions; international cooperation to reduce transboundary and
intercontinental air toxic pollution; National Emissions Inventory (NEI) development and
updates; Persistent Bioaccumulative Toxics (PBT) activities; and training for air pollution
professionals. In addition, the air toxics program includes activities for implementation of
MACT, Residual Risk, and Area Source standards and the National Air Toxics Assessment
(NATA) and the National Air Pollutant Assessment (NAPA).
NAAQS Program Strategy
Over the next several years, we will continue to focus on required reviews of the NAAQS and
on implementing the current PM and ozone NAAQS, including the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, the
2006 revised 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, the 1-hour ozone NAAQS (through anti-backsliding
requirements) and the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. In FY 2010, EPA finalized rulemaking for
the NAAQS for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and plans to finalize rulemaking for ozone in August
2010. EPA plans to place greater emphasis on integrating across OAR programs, specifically as
it relates to energy issues and air quality planning. EPA will provide opportunities for greater
collaboration with states, tribes and other federal agencies in addressing these air quality
problems and continued emphasis on innovative strategies to improve air quality. EPA will
provide technical assistance to states on emission reduction measures for PM2.5 and ozone
Final Guidance May?, 2010 20 of 63
-------
nonattainment areas through issuing guidance documents and training of air pollution
professionals. We will also be focusing on implementing the lead NAAQS, which is of
particular importance to areas with potential environmental justice concerns.
As previously discussed under the Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs subheading, EPA
will undertake rulemaking to address the DC Circuit Court's concerns with CAIR. During the
rulemaking process, EPA will continue to implement the current CAIR. Through the
implementation process, EPA will ensure that current CAIR is integrated with other NAAQS
programs and the regional haze program and will determine the degree those programs may still
rely on the emissions reductions from the current CAIR.
In the next few years, EPA, as a result of statutory requirements and court decisions, will be
promulgating a number of regulations that will affect the electric power industry: a Transport
Rule to replace CAIR; a rule to reduce air toxics from utilities, and New Source Performance
Standards for particulate matter, SO2, and NOX. The power sector is a sizeable emitter of all of
these pollutants. Preliminary analyses show that the public health benefits of these rulemakings
will likely be enormous. EPA will also be issuing new rules for the power sector to protect
water quality, fish, and other aquatic wildlife. There will also be a need to integrate all of these
rules with any climate regulatory strategy since the power sector will be an important element to
any future climate strategy. The most cost-effective way to implement these programs is through
a coordinated set of actions for this industry. EPA's integrated approach will assure that, to the
extent allowed by statute, the various policies and regulations work together in a coherent
manner. It will allow companies to take advantage of co-control opportunities and efficiencies
in developing compliance strategies while promoting energy security and a cleaner economy for
the future.
We will continue to work with states, tribes, and local air quality and transportation agencies
to implement transportation conformity regulations and to ensure the technical integrity of
mobile source controls in SIPs. We will also assist states, tribes, and local governments in
crafting strategies that accommodate growth and economic development while minimizing
adverse effects on air quality and other quality-of-life factors. This may include strategies to
integrate air quality management into land use, transportation, energy use, and community
development plans.
We will also continue to work with states, tribes, and local agencies to implement an
integrated ambient monitoring strategy which maximizes resource efficiency by deploying
coordinated monitoring networks (i.e. combining platforms where feasible) toward current data
collection needs for ozone, PM, 862, NCh, lead, regional haze, and air toxics
We will continue to redesign our current emissions factor program for both criteria and air
toxics pollutants to: (1) make the development of emissions factors more self-supporting and
open to fuller participation by external organizations; (2) increase the use of electronic means to
standardize the development process, quantify the quality components, and streamline all aspects
of emissions factors development and use; (3) make the emissions factors uncertainties and
emissions quantification methodologies more transparent to users; and (4) provide direction on
the proper application of emissions factors consistent with non-inventory program goals
including clearer guidance and direction on use of more direct quantification tools (e.g.,
Final Guidance May?, 2010 21 of 63
-------
emissions monitoring) in lieu of emissions factors; and (5) consider environmental justice in
prioritizing the development of factors.
NAAOS - FY 2011 Priorities
Headquarters
• Provide annual air quality reports to regions by June 1, 2010 and work with regions to
develop appropriate actions to bring new violating attainment areas into compliance with
theNAAQS.
• Work with the regions on a consistent approach for making final clean air determinations
for 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 nonattainment areas and 1997 moderate 8-hour ozone NAAQS
nonattainment areas that attained by their attainment date based on the Clean Data Policy,
and for taking action to approve attainment date extensions and making findings of
failure to attain as necessary.
• Continue to encourage and implement programs that result in cleaner burning appliances,
provide information to the public on how to burn biomass more cleanly, and identify
tools and resources for innovative financing approaches.
• Continue to coordinate and provide technical and policy guidance to the regions on the
PM2.5 implementation programs for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
• Work with federal, state, and tribal partners to address fire emissions impact on
attainment of the NAAQS and the regional haze progress goals.
• Provide technical and policy guidance to regions on implementing the lead, NO2, and
SO2 NAAQS.
• Work with regions to review §110(a)(2) infrastructure SIP submittals for the 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 and lead NAAQS.
• Work with regions to determine if the extreme 1-hour ozone nonattainment areas have
attained by their November 15, 2010 attainment date and work with them on a consistent
approach for making determinations that areas attained by their attainment date, or
making findings of failure to attain as necessary.
• Review quarterly data, and monitor progress of CAFO monitoring study.
• Review monitoring data and begin development of CAFO emission estimation
methodologies.
• Coordinate best management practice (BMP) studies with USDA for CAFO minimizing
emissions.
• Continue outreach and education of public and animal industry on CAFO air emission
issues.
• Explore/evaluate potential tools to develop the CAFO process-based model for emission
estimates.
• Provide technical direction to industry/academic groups conducting their own CAFO
studies so their quality assurance and monitoring protocols will be consistent with the
National Air Emissions Monitoring Study (NAEMS).
• Provide support on integrated and multi-pollutant air pollution planning activities.
• Work with regions on development and review of fee programs to satisfy CAA §185.
• Issue Notice of Rulemaking for NO2 /SO2 secondary NAAQS for welfare effects.
• Early in 2011, issue final implementation rule for 2010 ozone NAAQS.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 22 of 63
-------
• Work with regions on a consistent approach for designating areas for the 2010 ozone
NAAQS.
• Develop baselines for measuring air quality in areas with potential environmental justice
concerns. (Supports Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goal 3 (see Appendix G).)
• Improve analytical tools to assess environmental justice impacts of rulemakings.
(Supports Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goal 3 (see Appendix G).)
• Improve communication and outreach to environmental justice communities to promote
meaningful involvement in the rulemaking process. (Supports Environmental Justice
Draft Work Plan Goal 1 (see Appendix G).)
• Develop a web-based SIP resource center and SIP best practices.
• Administer a wood smoke reduction program.
• Issue guidance (or updated guidance) on exceptional events.
Regions
• Review air quality reports and work with states to develop appropriate actions to bring
new violating attainment areas into compliance with the NAAQS.
• Take final rulemaking action within 18 months of receipt of any redesignation request
that is not impacted by national policy developments (such as the Transport Rule).
• Track allowable and actual processing times for SIPs processed during the fiscal year and
submit midyear and end-of-year reports to the National SIP Processing Workgroup.
• Manage the processing of SIP revisions to ensure final rulemaking actions on all ozone
and PM2.5 SIPs are completed consistent with the annual SIP processing goal.
• Process voluntary and mandatory reclassifications for 8-hour ozone areas.
• Coordinate with states, tribes, and local governments on designating initial nonattainment
areas for the lead NAAQS.
• Take final rulemaking actions on remaining 1997 PM2.5 and 1997 8-hr ozone NAAQS
SIP submittals (e.g., RFP, attainment demonstrations).
• Make attainment determinations for 1997 PM2 5 nonattainment areas with an April 5,
2010 attainment date and 1997 8-hr ozone areas with a June 15, 2010 attainment date.
• Issue clean air determination actions and grant one-year extensions, as appropriate, for
1997 PM2.s nonattainment areas with an April 5, 2010 attainment date.
• Issue attainment determination actions for 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas with a
June 15, 2010 attainment date including mandatory reclassifications, clean air data
findings, or one-year attainment extension date.
• Coordinate with states and tribes on areas designated nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS and begin assisting them to develop plans to attain the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
• Support state monitoring network and tribal implementation of lead and rural ozone
monitors.
• Assist states to develop and submit SIPs due for the 1997 8-hr ozone Subpart 1
nonattainment areas that were reclassified to Subpart 2.
• Assist states to develop timely §110(a)(2) infrastructure SIP submittals for the 2008 lead
NAAQS for submission in 2011.
• Work with the regions to take final approval on the 110(a)(2) infrastructure SIP
submittals for 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS that were due in September 2009. Work
with states to determine if the extreme 1-hour ozone nonattainment areas have attained
by their November 15, 2010 attainment date.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 23 of 63
-------
• Coordinate with states, tribes, and local governments on developing air quality
forecasting for ozone and PM2.5 and in enhancing public reporting
(http: //envirofl ash. info).
• Work with and assist Regional enforcement staff.
• Work with states to recognize and address environmental justice issues that can be
addressed in SIPs. (Supports Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goal 3 (see
Appendix G).)
Regional Haze - FY 2011 Priorities
Headquarters
• Continue to coordinate with Federal Land Managers on regional haze issues.
• Continue to coordinate with regions and provide technical and policy assistance on
regional haze SIPs.
• Assist the regions with any Federal Implementation Plans (FIPs) needed to meet the
regional haze requirements.
Regions
• Manage the processing of SIP revisions to ensure final rulemaking actions on all regional
haze SIPs are completed consistent with the annual SIP processing goal.
NAAQS Ambient Monitoring - Remaining FY 2010 Priorities, and FY 2011 Priorities
Headquarters
• Provide technical monitoring support for revised NAAQS and NAAQS reviews.
• Manage the national contracts for filter purchases, and the national contract for laboratory
analysis of filters for speciation including providing data to review by states and
submitting data to AQS.
• Monitor timeliness and completeness on the national scale for EPA-supported monitoring
and flag still-unresolved issues for Regional Office resolution.
• Review data certification documentation and set certification flags on AQS data where
certification/QA requirements have been met.
• Complete Management System Reviews of at least two Regional monitoring programs.
• Publish/Prepare National report on precision and bias performance by September 30,
2010.
• Coordinate with regions to ensure the independent QA of NAAQS monitoring sites.
• Publish/prepare National report on 2010 Performance Evaluation Program (PEP) and
National Performance Audit Program (NPAP) findings within two months of each audit
and overall by July 1, 2011.
• Award/manage interagency agreement with National Park Service for operation of
IMPROVE monitors for regional visibility. Allow states and tribes to use this mechanism
for IMPROVE-protocol sampling at other locations.
• Review and approve/disapprove requests for Federal Equivalent Methods (FEM) for
continuous PM2.5 methods within 120 days of completed application, and similarly act on
each first request for each Approved Regional Method (ARM).
Final Guidance May?, 2010 24 of 63
-------
• Develop ambient monitoring portion of the FY 2012 national program and grant guidance
consistent with NAAQS final monitoring rules, the national strategy, in collaboration
with state, tribal, and local leadership, and regions by April 2011.
• Host next national ambient monitoring conference in partnership with the National
Association of Clean Air Agencies. The conference expected to be held early in FY 2012
(i.e., late calendar year 2011).
Regions
• Identify and resolve completeness and timeliness issues with regard to quarterly data
submission by monitoring agencies.
• Evaluate submitters' annual data certification requests and documentation and forward to
HQ when adequate.
• Review the evidence that state/local monitoring programs meet 40 CFR Part 58
appendices A, C, D, and E as applicable (evidence is a required element in annual
monitoring plans due July 1) and seek corrective action by monitoring agencies where
needed.
• Review requests for changes in state monitoring plans and act on them within 120 days.
• Manage contracts for independent performance audits of state/local monitor networks
(PEP and NPAP), for those states choosing that approach to independent audits (some
regions only).
• Perform Technical Systems Audits on 1/3 of reporting organizations, or as required to
achieve an audit of each agency within a 3-year period.
• Transfer State and Tribal Air Grant (STAG) funds to OAQPS for any additional
state/tribal IMPROVE-protocol sites requested by state, tribal, or local agencies by May
2011 for monitoring to begin/continue in July 2011.
Title V and NSR - FY 2011 Priorities
Headquarters
• Support regions in issuing permits and evaluating Title V and NSR permit programs.
• Support and maintain Title V permit activity database (TOPS).
• Support tribal efforts in developing Title V and NSR permitting programs and delegation
requests.
• Continue to assist regions on NSR regulatory revisions and proposed regulations.
• Continue to assist regions in implementing the final regulations for permitting new and
modified sources in Indian country.
• Continue to modify existing NSR permit regulations, as necessary, to be consistent with
the ozone and PM NAAQS.
• Prepare and issue final orders on citizen petitions based on drafts from regions.
• Provide training and technical guidance to regions and states.
• Develop sector- and source-specific guidance that will help permitting authorities and
affected sources better understand program requirements for GHGs, GHG emissions for
the selected source categories, methods for estimating those emissions, control strategies
for GHG emissions, and available GHG measurement and monitoring techniques.
• Incorporate environmental justice considerations into permitting guidance. (Supports
Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goal 3 (see Appendix G).)
Final Guidance May?, 2010 25 of 63
-------
Regions
• Review proposed initial, significant modifications and renewal operating permits, as
necessary, to ensure consistent implementation of the Title V program.
• Report active Title V permits via the Title V Operating Permits database (TOPS) and
update all applicable TOPS data.
• For purposes of updating TOPs, report outstanding renewals of Title V permits (permits
older than 5 years that have not been renewed).
• Issue Title V permits to respond to objections when permitting authority fails to act.
• Continue working on completing, per agreed upon schedules, remaining first-round Title
V program evaluations pursuant to March 2002 Office of Inspector General (OIG) report.
• Prepare draft orders to citizen (public) petitions based upon OAQPS' petition handling
process.
• Perform 1/4 of follow-up Title V program evaluations for programs with at least 20
permits pursuant to February 2005 OIG report and set target to issue evaluation report
within the fiscal year.
• Issue PSD and Part 71 permits in Indian country. Regions will issue PSD permits within
one year of receipt of a complete application.
• Continue to assist permitting authorities on NSR regulatory revisions and proposed
regulations.
• Evaluate NSR permit programs, as warranted and set target to issue reports within 120
days of evaluation.
• Provide training and technical guidance and support to permitting authorities and the
public, as necessary.
• Take action on all NSR SIPs/TIPs.
• Continue issuance of Title V permits on tribal and other federal lands, as necessary.
• Review major NSR/PSD permits for new and modified sources, as necessary, to ensure
consistent implementation of the NSR program.
• Provide End of Year Regional Progress Report for status of EPA review of NSR permits.
Air Toxics Program
To reduce exposure to air toxics, EPA develops and issues federal standards for major
stationary sources and area sources, and conducts national, regional, and community-based
efforts to reduce risks from air toxics. EPA develops and refines tools, training, handbooks, and
information to assist partners in characterizing risks from air toxics, and works with them on
strategies for making local decisions to reduce those risks. EPA will work with state and local
agencies to expand the national toxics monitoring network with a particular focus on
community-scale assessments, and will compile and analyze information from local assessments
to better characterize risk and assess priorities. The toxics program and strategies include the
following:
• Work with partners to: (1) improve the technical specifications and procedures for the
National Air Toxics Trends Stations (NATTS) ambient monitoring network, (2) support
short-duration local-scale (also known as community-scale) monitoring studies, and (3)
develop improved emission factors. (Federal funding support for the NATTS network
Final Guidance May?, 2010 26 of 63
-------
and local-scale monitoring studies is addressed under the State and Local Air Quality
Management section below, and in Appendix C.)
• Implement a residual risk program and support community assessment and risk reduction
projects, and compile and analyze the information collected from them to better
characterize risk and assess priorities for further action. These air toxics mandates will
be used as a driver for multi-pollutant reductions.
• Write rules for source categories (Note: Rules are listed under the Federal Stationary
Source Regulations subheading earlier in this chapter).
• Provide technical expertise and support to state, tribal, and local air toxics programs in
assessing and reducing major stationary source, area source, and mobile source air toxics.
• Continue to develop and improve risk assessments and management methodologies.
• Develop and implement innovative emission reduction approaches.
• Work with communities through EPA's Communities for a Renewed Environment
(CARE) program and other community-based efforts to address environmental justice
issues that are associated with disproportionate exposure to air toxics. (Supports
Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goal 2 (see Appendix G).)
• Improve analytical tools to assess environmental justice and improve communications
and outreach to promote meaningful involvement of these communities in the rulemaking
process. (Supports Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goals 1, 2, and 3 (see
Appendix G).)
• EPA activities that assist in the toxics reduction strategy include the NEI, NATA, NAP A,
air quality modeling, the National Clean Diesel Campaign, and data analysis programs.
In addition, the Air Toxics Monitoring Program indirectly and in some cases directly
supports all the technical tools as well as the programs noted above.
Air Toxics Implementation - FY 2011 Priorities
Headquarters
• Support the new Emission Inventory System (EIS) and finalize the 2008 Inventory.
• Begin development of the 2008 NAT A/NAP A assessment
• Work with regions, states, tribes, and local governments to develop and implement
community-based air toxics programs that address outdoor, indoor, and mobile sources,
including areas near schools and areas with potential environmental justice concerns.
This includes efforts that support the Urban Air Toxics Strategy, Community Action for a
Renewed Environment (CARE) program, and joint OAR-OECA toxics initiative.
(Supports Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goal 2 (see Appendix G).)
• Continue developing tools and guidance for communities.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 27 of 63
-------
• Develop baselines for measuring air quality in areas with potential environmental justice
concerns. (Supports Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goal 3 (see Appendix G).)
• Undertake biannual assessments of the environmental benefits being achieved in
environmental justice areas as a result of diesel emission reduction programs. (Supports
Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goal 4 (see Appendix G).)
• Continue to oversee and approve qualification of Phase 2 for outdoor hydronic heaters.
• Coordinate with specific regions to implement the Sustainable Skylines Initiative by
working with cities and tribes that have already received grants.
• Continue to implement partnership programs for biomass fueled appliances, e.g.,
hydronic heaters, low-mass fireplaces.
• Continue to redesign our emission factors program as described under "Federal Support
for Air Quality Management."
Regions
• Work with states, tribes, and local governments on reviewing the draft 2008
NATA/NAPA
• Review new NEI process and EIS components and assist states, tribes, and local
governments with similar reviews.
• Provide feedback to HQ on new NEI process and EIS components.
• Work with HQ on developing risk-based programs and assist in developing area source
standards.
• Work with states, tribes, and local governments to: (1) implement a residual risk
program, and (2) assess and address the combined impact of multiple sources of air
toxics, encouraging voluntary reductions of air toxics from indoor and outdoor sources.
• Assist states, tribes, and local governments where appropriate in conducting data analysis
and assessment for air quality management implications in general. (Applies to states
conducting air toxics monitoring regardless of funding source.)
» Work with states, tribes, and local governments to develop and implement area source
programs.
• Delegate and provide implementation assistance to states, tribes, and local governments
for section 111, 112, and 129 standards, as needed.
• Work with Headquarters to implement section 111, 112 and 129 standards, including
Federal 11 l(d)/129 plans, in areas where states do not.
• As appropriate, provide assistance, data, and information to HQ in order to help facilitate
revisions/amendments to section 111,11 l(d), 112 and 129 rules and associated Federal
Plans.
• Work with HQ, states, tribes, and local governments to develop and implement
community-based air toxics programs that address outdoor, indoor, and mobile sources,
including areas near schools and areas with potential environmental justice concerns.
This includes efforts that support the Urban Air Toxics Strategy, Community Action for a
Renewed Environment (CARE) program, and joint OAR-OECA toxics initiative.
(Supports Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goal 2 (see Appendix G).)
• As appropriate, participate in residual risk analyses for MACT and/or GACT standard
source categories, and standard setting process.
• Provide training to states, tribes, and local governments on air toxics program
requirements.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 28 of 63
-------
• Work with state, tribes, and local governments to implement woodsmoke reduction
programs.
• Work with HQ to implement the Sustainable Skylines Initiative by providing support to
cities and Tribes that have already received grants.
Air Toxic Monitoring - FY 2011 Priorities
Headquarters
• Transfer 103 funds for National Air Toxics Trends Stations (NATTS) grants to affected
Regional Offices.
• Manage national contract for NATTS lab analysis.
• Conduct Proficiency Testing and Technical System Audits for national contract lab and
state/local labs servicing NATTS, and report results within 60 days of audit after
opportunity for state/local lab review of draft audit report.
• Provide national/regional-scale analysis of currently available air toxics data by
September 2011, with conclusions relevant to air quality management and to establishing
future goals for the NATTS program and other monitoring initiatives.
• Hold National Air Toxics Data Analysis Workshop in 2011 or present information as part
of National Ambient Air Monitoring Conference.
• Monitor NATTS data submissions for completeness and timeliness.
• Conduct a grant competition for community-scale air toxics ambient monitoring projects.
Provide guidance to regions for negotiating individual grants to ensure that data meet risk
screening, risk characterization, and/or risk assessment requirements where appropriate
given study objectives that were material in selecting the project for funding.
• Provide mechanism for optional participation in Proficiency Testing and Technical
System Audits by labs which are not direct NATTS participants. (Cost would be borne
by the approved state/local lab.)
• Provide tools and guidance for analyzing local air toxics data.
• Review Technical Assistance Document and update if appropriate.
• Expand air toxics monitoring in low income and minority communities and take next
steps on school toxics monitoring initiative. (Supports Environmental Justice Draft Work
Plan Goal 2 (see Appendix G).)
Regions
• Ensure NATTS work plans are consistent with program office template guidance.
• Ensure NATTS QAPP is adequate to provide quality data for submission to AQS.
• Participate in at least 50% of NATTS TSA lab and field site audits.
• Track status and coordinate needed follow-up actions between the program office and
states, tribes, and local agencies in support of the NATTS QA program (e.g., TSA and PT
activities).
• Identify and resolve completeness and timeliness issues with regard to quarterly data
submission by monitoring agencies.
• Award the community scale air toxics ambient monitoring grants, as applicable.
• Assist states, tribes, and local governments in siting, installing, and operating new and
upgraded toxic monitoring equipment for community scale grant projects.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 29 of 63
-------
Review Q A programs and ensure compatibility of community scale air toxics
measurements across projects and with NATTS, where appropriate.
Ensure community scale QAPP is adequate to provide quality data for submission to
AQS and/or ensure that the project results meet the requirements of the approved QAPP.
Assess and review existing air toxics networks, and assist states, tribes, and local
agencies in the siting, installation, and operation of new and upgraded toxic monitoring
equipment.
Ensure QAPP is adequate to provide quality data for submission to AQS.
STATE AND LOCAL AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT
Program Description
The state and local air quality management program includes funding and associated program
support to assist state and local air pollution control agencies in developing and implementing
continuing programs to attain and maintain the NAAQS and to assess, prevent, and control air
pollution such as hazardous air pollutants. Continuing program activities include not only state
plan preparation and implementation for the NAAQS, but also related air quality monitoring and
network upkeep, emission inventories, modeling and analysis, permitting, and conducting
oversight and compliance activity associated with non-TitleV sources including small and area
air toxics sources, providing technical assistance, and responding to citizen complaints. The
annual details of many of these activities, including the HQ and Regional Office roles, are
articulated in the 'priorities' sections of the various program descriptions.
The program also provides funding to interstate transport commissions, and other multi-
jurisdictional organizations (composed of state and local agency representation) to help
coordinate air quality improvement efforts.
Funding is also provided to reduce diesel emissions from the existing diesel fleet, including
stationary diesel engines and school buses using authority provided under the Energy Policy Act
of 2005. Funding may be available on a competitive or a formula basis depending upon the
nature of diesel program component and the entities eligible.
State and local agencies also maintain Title V operating permit programs for major stationary
and other sources. Title V activities are funded through operating permit fees and are not grant-
eligible. Further, Title V permit fees cannot be used to fund grant-eligible activities.
Program Strategy
EPA's overall strategy for achieving clean outdoor air includes a comprehensive, multi-
pollutant approach that combines national, regional, and local measures with responsibilities for
implementation carried out by the most appropriate and effective level of government.
Typically, problems with broad national or global impact are best handled at the federal level.
State and local agencies can best address regional and local problems that remain after federal
measures are applied. Inherent in these efforts is EPA's policy to ensure that collaborative and
timely consultation occurs with its partners in the areas of planning, priority-setting, budgeting,
Final Guidance May?, 2010 30 of 63
-------
and implementation. It is EPA's policy to seek prior consultation with partners on the allocation
and use of grant resources. This guidance reflects input from states, local agencies, and tribes on
EPA's continuing efforts to identify and resolve issues associated with the purposes, distribution,
and use of grant resources.
In implementing the state and local air quality management component of this strategy EPA
will:
• Work with state, local, and other governmental partners to target available STAG
resources to those air pollution problems which pose the greatest risk to public health
(e.g., fine particles, ozone, and hazardous air pollutants; disparate impacts affecting low-
income, minority, tribal or other disadvantaged populations);
• Secure and allocate resources to address not only the attainment of PM2.5, ozone, and
other NAAQS, but also support ongoing state and local air program operations and
delegated programs which help maintain healthy air quality;
• Encourage support for regional and community-scale strategies that complement the
impacts of federal measures (e.g.: action day programs; air quality reporting; wood
smoke reduction programs; diesel retrofits and other mobile source initiatives; and,
integrated air toxics monitoring, risk assessment, and reduction projects);
• Provide support to assist states, tribes, and local agencies to develop air quality
forecasting programs, especially the addition of forecasting particle pollution;
• Target significant resources to recipients to develop, refine, and maintain monitoring
systems and emission inventories which help provide a clear picture of the nature and
sources of air pollution and help gauge the impacts of preventive and mitigative measures
employed;
• Support the efforts of states and multi-jurisdictional organizations (MJOs) to develop
information and strategies for use by states and tribes in reducing haze and improving
visibility across the country, including formerly pristine areas;
• Provide resources that focus on transboundary or binational, geographically-specific
environmental issues involving a multi-pollutant, multi-state, and sometimes a multi-
media approach;
• Provide support for training and other associated program support to assist state, local,
multi-state, and other agencies in addressing their air pollution problems;
• Provide training and technical support to assist states, tribes, and local agencies in
developing and conducting wood boiler and wood stove changeout programs to reduce
particle pollution; to implement a clean burning education campaign; and,
• Provide resources to eligible entities to support diesel engine retrofits, rebuilds and
replacements, and idling reduction technologies that target reductions from the existing
diesel fleet.
Grant Assistance to Co-Implementors: FY 2011 Increases
The President's FY 2011 budget request includes a total of $390.72 million in STAG funds
for outdoor and indoor air grant programs carried out by multi-state, state, local and tribal
agencies, and other eligible entities. This is a significant increase of $85 million over the FY
2009 level and $82.5 million over the FY 2010 enacted level. Of this amount, $309.08 million is
targeted for continuing air programs carried out by state and local air agencies. An increase of
Final Guidance May?, 2010 31 of 63
-------
$266K has also been requested for tribal air programs while requests for the state indoor radon
and diesel emission reduction grant programs have not changed. The FY 2011 request does not
include funds for two areas funded in FY 2010: Climate Showcase and Targeted Airshed grants.
Table 2 compares the FY 2011 request to FY 2009 and FY 2010 enacted levels.
Table 2 - Comparison of State and Tribal Assistance Grants for Air: FYs 2009-FY 2011 (in $M)
Program Area
Continuing State/Local Air Program
Diesel Emission Reduction Program*
State Indoor Radon
Tribal Air Program**
Climate Showcase Communities
Targeted Airshed Grants
CA Emission Reduction Project
Grants
Total
FY 2009 Enacted
$224.080
$60.000
$8.074
$13.300
$10.000
$15.000
$330.540
FY 2010 Enacted
$226.580
$60.000
$8.074
$13.300
$10.000
$20.000
$337.954
President's FY 201 1 Request
$309.080
$60.000
$8.074
$13.566
$390.720
* Includes Clean School Bus Initiative funds.
** The President's request also includes significant increases in the Tribal General Assistance Program and a new Tribal
Multimedia Implementation grant program that could benefit tribal air programs.
The President's budget request divides the $85 million increase into three components: $45
million to support the expanded core state and local agency workload associated with
implementing the additional ozone, NC>2, 862, lead, and fine particulate NAAQS and addressing
risks from air toxics; $25 million to address development of state and local technical capacity to
address GHG emissions in permitting of large sources identified pursuant to regulation under the
CAA; and, $15 million specifically targeted for the increased number of monitors required by the
new or revised NAAQS.
Core Activities: State and local agencies, which have been grappling with constrained budgets,
are also facing an increasing workload as EPA updates and issues more protective NAAQS. The
NAAQS have triggered, and will continue to trigger, the preparation of new or updated SIPs.
Due to the multi-pollutant, and often regional nature of air pollution, preparation and
implementation of the plans to deal with it will become increasingly complex requiring
additional modeling, technical analysis, updated emission inventories, monitoring, and increased
stakeholder involvement and coordination. The $45 million is intended to supplement the
existing level of funds that state and local agencies have been using for continuing program
responsibilities. In a recent retreat with the National Association of Clean Air Agencies
(NACAA), EPA agreed to joint discussions with state and local representatives on the
implementation of various aspects of the continuing air program. As part of this collaborative
effort, EPA sought and received specific comments on the distribution and use of state/local
grant resources and these comments were considered in the development of the Agency's
preliminary allocation of FY 2011 STAG resources. A preliminary national (region-by-region)
allocation of these funds is included in Appendix B of the guidance, but discussions on the
allocation continue and the allocations will change.
Increasing Capacity for GHG Permitting: While initial rules and guidance covering the
permitting of sources to include GHG emissions will be issued during FY 2010, EPA anticipates
Final Guidance May 7, 2010
32 of 63
-------
that state and local agencies with approved or delegated permitting authority will require
additional grant resources to effectively prepare for increased GHG-related program
responsibilities. This includes staff development and training, program planning and analysis,
source identification, outreach to industry, and responding to the public. EPA is still developing
an allocation rationale for these funds and will be requesting additional comment from states,
locals, and tribes before issuing a final allocation within the next several months.
Monitoring: The CAA requires EPA to review each of the NAAQS every five years. Each
revision of the NAAQS provides greater protection of public health and may place new
monitoring requirements on our state and local partners. The additional funding requested for
FY 2011 will help defray the purchase costs of new monitors for ozone, lead, SC>2, and NC>2 for
state and local agencies. Air monitoring is addressed in greater detail in Appendix C. The
Agency is still in the process of developing a detailed allocation for these resources. The
allocation will largely be influenced by the final NAAQS rules.
Other Grant Programs
A discussion of state indoor radon grants can be found in the Indoor Environments chapter of
the guidance. Also note that information on allocation of tribal air grants will be provided at a
later date. The EPA Tribal air program contact is Barrel Harmon at 202-564-7416. Finally,
information on competitive grant opportunities and programs is typically provided via separate
announcement at: http://www.epa.gov/air/grants funding.html.
Diesel Emission Reductions Grant Program
The budget request for FY 2011 also includes funds to support the Diesel Emission Reduction
Act (DERA), part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. This includes funding for competitive
federal grants to reduce diesel emissions from the existing fleet. Sections 791-797 of the Energy
Policy Act authorize these grant funds which will support implementation of the National Clean
Diesel Campaign.
Through the Diesel Emission Reduction Program (DERA), OAR will continue its focus on
reducing PM emissions from existing diesel engines (which are not subject to the new, more
stringent emission standards that took effect in 2007 and later). These engines often remain in
service for 20 or more years, and this program will help provide immediate reductions by
retrofitting these engines with emission control technologies sooner than would otherwise occur
through normal turnover of the fleet. Implementation of the program will produce criteria air
pollutant and air toxics benefits.
In FY 2011, EPA expects to fund at least 100 additional new grants deploying technology in
various sectors using diesel engines. This program will support grants and loans for diesel
engine retrofits, rebuilds, replacements, cleaner fuels, idling reduction measures and low-cost
revolving loans. Up to 30% of the funds for diesel emissions reduction grants may again be
appropriated to provide formula grants to states to establish and support state clean diesel grant
or loan programs.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 33 of 63
-------
The Agency's strategy to implement this program and disseminate its associated clean diesel
funding is dependent on the actual appropriation levels and any accompanying language
regarding implementation. In addition, the timing of the actual appropriation will dictate when
EPA will publish its national announcement of funding availability. For more information
contact Jennifer Keller at 202-343-9541 or via email at keller.jennifer@epa.gov.
Clean Air Act Training
Section 103(b) of the CAA authorizes EPA to provide training for air pollution control
personnel and agencies and to make training grants to air pollution control agencies and other
qualified entities related to the causes, effects, extent, prevention, and control of air pollution. In
addition to the Agency resources that EPA targets, EPA is again targeting approximately $2
million in STAG funds for the support of CAA training provided by multi-jurisdictional
organizations and other state training programs in FY 2011. These funds are subject to
consultation and concurrence with participating state and local air pollution control agencies.
For more information contact Debbie Stackhouse in OAQPS at 919-541-5281.
Northeast Ozone Transport Commission (OTC)
The OTC was created pursuant to sections 176A and 184 of the CAA and is funded under
CAA §106. The OTC represents Northeastern and Mid-Atlantic States in the Ozone Transport
Region (OTR) in: a) assessing interstate transport of ozone and its precursors; and b)
determining the need for, and appropriateness of, additional control measures within the OTR, or
areas affecting the OTR. The OTC is supported by a small executive staff that functions largely
to coordinate OTC activities, facilitate communication among members, and serve as the point of
contact for organizations external to the OTC, including EPA. The OTC also serves as the
regional haze planning organization for the OTR, in concert with the Northeast States for
Coordinated Air Use Management and the Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management Association.
For FY 2011, the OTC's activity is expected to continue to focus on six areas: general
analytical support to member states; analysis of mobile, stationary, and area source measures,
particularly new clean air technologies; member communications; solicitation of non-
governmental stakeholder input; coordination with other organizations; and consensus building.
The focus areas are supported by OTC committees that develop and recommend specific action
items for the Commission and the member states. The OTC implements its policy
recommendations through consensus resolutions and draft model rules that provide guidance to
member states. For more information contact Pat Childers in OAR at 202-564-1082, or at
childers.pat@epa.gov.
Multi-Jurisdictional Organizations (MJOs)
National Association of Clean Air Agencies (NACAA)
NACAA is the national association of state, territorial, and local air pollution control
agencies. It comprises representatives from member air pollution control agencies and is
supported by a small staff in Washington, D.C. Member agencies support NACAA with their
STAG funds. They do this by either providing their prior consent to EPA to target a portion
of the funds that would otherwise be allotted to them instead for direct award to NACAA; or
Final Guidance May?, 2010 34 of 63
-------
they direct that NACAA bill them directly for their membership contribution. Section 105
recipients who are not members of NACAA do not have their allotments affected. The award
of funds to NACAA is still subject to review by the Agency including the applicability of the
Agency's Competition Policy. See Appendix B.
NACAA provides associated program support to its member state and local agencies by
coordinating the air quality activities of state and local air pollution control officials at the
national level and engaging in activities that enhance the effectiveness of their agencies. This
includes: the dissemination of information to membership via electronic and print means,
support for member technical advisory committees, planning and sponsoring of air quality
conferences and technical workshops, serving as a state/local liaison to EPA, coordination of
member participation on EPA and joint State-EPA technical committees, production of
technical assistance for members such as model rules and implementation strategies, and
addressing air pollution control issues in concert with other public and private interests. For
more information, contact William Houck at 202-564-1349 or via email at
houck.william@epa.gov.
Regional-level Multi-Jurisdictional Organizations
Numerous state and local agencies have found it advantageous to form multi-jurisdictional
organizations (MJOs) to help coordinate their geographically-specific clean air interests at the
regional level. These organizations typically comprise the member agencies and develop
relevant mission statements, charters and budgets. A state or local agency wishing to fund an
MJO may: a) direct that the EPA Regional Office set aside that agency's desired contribution
from its prospective portion of the regional allotment (i.e., on a pre-allotment basis); or, b)
directly fund the organization once the state or local agency receives its allotment. An EPA
Region may provide STAG funding to such an organization using §103 authority only if the
contributing agencies provide their prior consent, the MJO is eligible for the funding, and the
MJO's activities are appropriate as associated program support. Additionally, EPA must
make a finding as to whether the organization should receive its grant on a non-competitive
basis consistent with the Agency's Competition Policy. See Appendix B. Funding for these
regional MJOs is not delineated as part of the national region-by-region allocation of STAG
funds but is instead identified within the respective Region's allotments to its state and local
agencies.
Regional Planning Organizations
Regional Haze Planning Organizations (RPOs), drawn from existing multi-jurisdictional
organizations, were created to assist states, tribes and other stakeholders in identifying,
analyzing, and addressing their multi-jurisdictional regional haze and visibility problems.
The RPOs were instrumental in providing states, locals, and tribes with the needed materials
to complete the preparation of the required Regional Haze SIPs. The plans were due to EPA
from the states by December 17, 2007. Many state plans have not yet been submitted or are
not yet able to be approved. EPA ended dedicated funding for regional haze RPOs in FY
2009. For information on current RPO functions please contact Jeff Whitlow in the Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards at 919-541-5523.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 35 of 63
-------
The Agency has continued to receive comments from some states and tribes that key
analytical tools, expertise, and the regional forums that the regional haze planning
organizations provided merit continued support. Their point is that continued support for
RPOs is needed not only for future regional haze SIP work but also for broader regional
planning needs given the regional nature of air pollution and the increasingly complex plans
and strategies necessary to address it—i.e., regional air quality management strategies based
on additional and more complex modeling, refined emissions inventories, and increased
stakeholder involvement.
To address these concerns, OAR and NACAA have established a workgroup to examine
the continued need, available resources, and optimum organizational structure for support of
broader, multi-pollutant and regional planning. OAR will be seeking additional input from
state, local, and tribal agencies, multi-jurisdictional organizations, and other stakeholders on
this matter. For additional information on this effort please contact Jerry Kurtzweg in the
Office of Air and Radiation at 202-564-1234.
NAAOS - FY 2011 Priorities
Regions should:
• Work with states to review air quality reports and take appropriate actions to eliminate
future violations in attainment areas that violate any of the NAAQS.
States should:
• As appropriate, submit redesignation requests including maintenance plans for areas with
clean air quality data.
• Submit NAAQS pollutant data, PAMS, and QA data to AQS directly or indirectly
through another organization according to schedule in 40 CFR Part 58 (applies to all
state/local primary quality assurance organizations).
• Continue to implement SIPs for 1997 PM2.5 and ozone NAAQS.
• Submit any outstanding PM2.5 and ozone SIP elements.
• Consult with EPA as necessary to finalize area designations for the lead NAAQS.
• Implement NOx and SO2 requirements under CAIR.
• Begin planning for 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS SIPs due no later than December 2012.
• Information regarding lessons learned from the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP)
pilot projects in the States of New York and North Carolina and in the city of St. Louis
(Missouri and Illinois) will be available in spring 2010. States should refer to this
information and should begin to integrate activities affecting or affected by air quality
(e.g. land use, transportation, energy, climate, environmental justice, and ecosystem
impacts) into their planning efforts.
• Conduct public notification and education efforts, including reporting air quality
forecasts and current conditions for ozone and particle pollution.
• Implement strategies for controlling emissions from wood smoke where it is a primary
contribution to air quality problems.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 36 of 63
-------
Regional Haze - 2011 Priorities
States should:
• Continue to work with regions on issues related to submitted regional haze SIPs.
• Implement BART requirements.
• Submit any outstanding regional haze SIP elements.
NAAQS Ambient Monitoring - 2011 Priorities
Regions should:
• Work with states to ensure that state monitoring networks for NAAQS, NCore, PM2 5
speciation, and PAMS meet applicable regulatory and guidance requirements.
States should:
• Implement lead monitoring at near-source locations.
• Plan to implement lead monitoring at non near-source locations as part of each state's
annual monitoring network plan due to EPA by July 1, 2010.
• Submit 2012 annual network plan required by 40 CFR § 58.10, by July 1, 2011 unless
another schedule has been approved (state/local only, unless tribal work plan
requirement). The plan should provide for the movement or start-up of additional ozone
monitoring stations associated with smaller urban areas and non-urban areas, if required.
• Operate monitors for other NAAQS pollutants, NCore, PM2.5 speciation, and PAMS
according to 40 CFR Part 58, approved monitoring plans, and/or grant agreements
including QMPs and QAPPs.
• Submit NAAQS pollutant data, PAMS, NCore and QA data to AQS according to
schedule in 40 CFR Part 58.
• Certify 2010 NAAQS pollutant data in AQS and provide supporting documentation by
May 1, 2011 (state/local only, unless tribal work plan requirement).
• Ensure adequate, independent QA audits of NAAQS monitors, including PEP and NPAP
or equivalent (state/local only, unless tribal work plan requirement).
• Conduct monthly QA checks for flow rates of PM2.s speciation monitors and submit data
quarterly to AQS. Target is for 75% completeness, (state/local only, unless tribal work
plan requirement).
• Report real time ozone and PM2.s data to AirNOW for cities required to report the AQI
(state/local only).
• Implement remaining measurements associated with NCore so that each station is ready
for full operation by January 1, 2011.
Air Toxics Ambient Monitoring - 2011 Priorities
Regions should:
• Work with states to ensure NATTS sites are operated according to EPA's technical
guidance and the QAPP and QMP.
States should:
• Operate NATTS sites according to national technical guidance and the QAPP and QMP.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 37 of 63
-------
• Participate in inter-laboratory Proficiency Testing and Technical System Audit programs
according to national guidance and the approved QAPP and QMP (state/local only).
• Submit NATTS data to AQS quarterly, within 120 days of end of each quarter. The data
objective for completeness rate is 85% of the potential concentration values for each
quarter (state/local only).
• Conduct federally-funded community assessment projects consistent with grant terms
(including schedule), technical guidance, and QAPP and QMP (state/local/tribal).
• Submit data from federally-funded community monitoring projects to AQS quarterly,
within 120 days of end of each quarter. The data objective for completeness rate is 85%
of the potential concentration values for the study period (state/local/tribal).
• Operate study sites based on the terms of QAPP and QMP (state/local/tribal).
• Submit data to AQS quarterly. The target data completeness rate is 85% of the potential
concentration values submitted within 120 days of end of each quarter (state/local/tribal).
Title V and NSR - 2011 Priorities
Regions should:
• Work with states to assist states in developing the technical capacity to address GHG
emissions in the permitting of large sources
States should:
• Ensure sources submit Title V applications for renewal.
• Provide timeliness data on new title V permits and significant permit modifications to
EPA Regional Offices for entry into TOPS.
• Continue to issue initial permits, significant modifications, and renewal Title V permits
and reduce backlog of renewal permits.
• Cooperate with EPA in Title V permit program evaluations, set target to respond within
90 days to EPA's evaluation report and implement recommendations as warranted.
• Issue new Title V permits and significant permit modifications within 18 months of
application completeness determined by permitting authority.
• Issue 78 % of maj or NSR permits within one year of receiving a complete permit
application.
• Issue NSR permits consistent with CAA requirements and enter BACT/LAER
determinations in the RBLC.
• Provide timeliness data on NSR permits issued for new major sources and major
modifications by entering data including "the application accepted date" and "the permit
issuance date" in to the RBLC national database.
Air Toxics Implementation - 2011 Priorities
States should:
• Quality assure, validate, and revise NEI facility data using EIS components.
• Collect data for the integrated 2008 HAP emissions inventory.
• Implement delegated or approved section 112, 11 l(d) and 129 standards, as appropriate,
for major sources and area sources.
• Implement delegated residual risk standards.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 38 of 63
-------
• Work with communities to develop and implement voluntary air toxics programs that
address outdoor, indoor, and mobile sources with emphasis on areas with potential
environmental justice concerns. (Supports Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goal
2 (see Appendix G).)
Use of the Exchange Network for Reporting Air Quality Monitoring Results
In a July 2009 memorandum, EPA Administrator Jackson made enhanced use of the National
Environmental Information Exchange Network a part of her strategic vision for the Agency. She
wrote in response to a unanimous request from the Environmental Council of the States
emerging from their spring 2009 meeting that she intends "the Agency to work with the states to
set an aggressive timetable for completing the transition to the Exchange Network (EN) for
regulatory and national system reporting...." She directed the NPMs to work to achieve the
vision of the Network as "the preferred way EPA, states, tribes, and others share and exchange
data." She added "I look forward to reviewing our progress toward achieving this goal...." In
response to this direction from the Administrator, OAR places a high priority on increasing the
use of the EN for the transmission of air quality measurement data from states, tribes, and
localities to EPA.
OAR Actions
As part of preparing this guidance EPA has examined the current process for submitting Air
Quality data, and will do the following in FY 2011 to address potential obstacles to increased use
of the exchange network:
• Deploy enhanced Central Data Exchange (CDX) EN client, allowing users with a valid
account to submit air quality data from any computer with a web browser or desktop
client;
• Modify software to simplify the EN submission work flow by eliminating the need for
the current "two step" process of data submission and verification when using the EN;
• Make available information, tools, and guidance needed to convert "flat files" to the EN
XML standard; and,
• Develop and conduct necessary training sessions for staff submitting air quality
measurement results in conjunction with the regions and ECOS
Regions should
Using the resources developed in FY 2010, regions should work with states to:
• Increase exchange network submissions to at least half of all state submissions per
Region during 2011
• Increase XML submissions to all or all but one of state submissions in each Region by
2012
• Encourage the use of the exchange network by non state submitters of air quality
information by making the EN client, XML tools and the necessary training available to
them.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 39 of 63
-------
TRIBAL AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT
The national Tribal Air Quality Management Program includes funding for Indian tribes and
Tribal Air Pollution Control Agencies, as well as providing training and support for tribes with
typically small staffs and limited resources. Through CAA §103 grants, tribal air pollution
control agencies, among others, may conduct and promote research, investigations, experiments,
demonstrations, surveys, studies and training related to air pollution. Tribes typically use this
funding source to research and investigate the air quality within, and emissions sources affecting,
lands within their jurisdiction. Through CAA §105 grants, tribes may develop and implement
programs for the prevention and control of air pollution or for the implementation of national
primary and secondary ambient air quality standards, NSR and permit programs, and delegated
federal programs like Part 71 and MACT standards. Tribes have the authority to set standards
and develop additional programs to meet their unique needs. This authority is grounded in the
CAA and the Tribal Authority Rule, as well as their inherent sovereign authority.
EPA is committed to work with the tribes, our regulatory partners, to assist them in
understanding their air quality, completing air quality assessments, setting appropriate air quality
goals, and developing air quality management programs appropriate to meet those goals. The
completion of air quality assessments in Indian country is achieved through a combination of
training and technical support of tribal staff in areas such as conducting assessments, source
characterizations, emission inventories, monitoring programs, modeling, and other analyses, as
appropriate. At the same time, work continues to improve and facilitate tribal participation in
the policy and programmatic aspects of the national air quality management program. As tribes
gain experience, they are then better able to address their air quality concerns, and enhance their
overall program development and participation. EPA is committed to supporting the National
Tribal Air Association (NTAA) as a leadership and coordination organization, working to
promote relationships between and amongst tribes and EPA. NTAA serves an important role in
facilitating tribal involvement in EPA policy and regulatory development.
EPA is also committed to building tribal capacity, where appropriate, to implement—either
directly through tribal regulations and Tribal Implementation Plans (TIPs), Title V programs, or
as partners in implementation of applicable Federal Implementation Plans (FIPs)—CAA
protections for human health and the environment for federally-recognized tribes. A primary
mechanism for this priority is to fund the American Indian Air Quality Training Program
(AIAQTP) in its role as a leader in tribal air quality training and technical support. The AIAQTP
provides a curriculum developed especially for the unique needs of Indian country. This
program has been instrumental in assisting tribes to develop the necessary skills to start and
implement air quality management programs in Indian country. The AIAQTP and EPA together
implement the Tribal Air Monitoring Support (TAMS) Center.
Grant Assistance to Tribes
Tribal STAG funds are allocated to tribes through each Regional Office (except Region 3
which has no federally-recognized tribes) based on a formula that includes factors such as tribal
population, number of tribes, nonattainment areas, and number of Title V sources. Regional
Final Guidance May?, 2010 40 of 63
-------
offices then allocate funds to tribes based on additional factors related to risk, environmental
goals, and tribal capacity. EPA STAG funding in recent years has been unable to provide grants
to every tribe requesting support, so this methodology allows funding decisions to be made in a
nationally-consistent manner while seeking to maximize the local environmental benefit.
OAR supports many tribal efforts to understand and address air quality, and many tribes
include monitoring and emission inventory programs in their activities. OAR provides funding
to approximately 52 tribes to monitor a variety of pollutants of concern to them, and many tribes
have provided an exemplary level of reliability and data capture in operating monitors of every
type. In addition, almost 50 tribes have completed emissions inventories to help determine
potential air quality and programmatic concerns for their tribe; some of these tribes have updated
their initial emission inventories. To continue the effectiveness and relevancy of these tribal
programs, OAR expects the Regional Offices and tribes to jointly determine where monitoring or
emissions inventory development is necessary, while OAR provides technical assistance through
the Tribal Air Monitoring Support (TAMS) Center. Overall, roughly 100 tribes will receive
CAA funding support to develop and operate air quality management programs to address their
air quality concerns and participate in the national program.
EPA's strategy is to provide flexibility for tribes and Regional Offices to address the many
different air quality situations on tribal lands on a case-by-case basis, rather than setting goals for
tribes at the national level. Ambient air monitoring often, but not always, will be an appropriate
one-time or continuing element of a tribal air quality assessment and management program.
Appendix C of this document provides revised interim guidance to help tribal and Regional
Office staff achieve clarity on the objectives of monitoring efforts. Tribes are also encouraged
(but not required) to develop programs that address air pollution. While tribes may be treated
like states for purposes of implementing CAA programs, they are not required to take delegation
of programs other that those that they believe are necessary to address their concerns in areas
where they have jurisdiction. Tribes are encouraged to develop programs that meet their needs
and to participate in local, regional, and national regulatory and policy development.
OAR expects tribal grants awarded in FY 2011 to include a commitment for quality-assured
monitoring data to be submitted (directly by the tribe or other agreed arrangement) on a timely
basis to AQS or other national database (e.g., AQS is not able to directly receive the data from
the CASTNET or IMPROVE networks at this time). EPA also encourages tribal participation in
forecasting and reporting air quality data to the public, but this should not be a condition
required in the grants.
In FY 2011, attention should continue to be paid to the quality assurance aspects of tribal air
monitoring programs. Every new or renewed grant supporting ambient monitoring on tribal
lands should require preparation and Regional Office approval of Quality Management Plans
(QMPs) and Quality Assurance Project Plans (QAPPs) that clearly identify the purposes to be
served by the monitoring. OAR has worked with the regions and monitoring organizations to
develop a graded approach for the development of these documents. The QAPP should provide
that tribal monitoring include regular precision and accuracy checks, using Appendix A of 40
CFR Part 58 as general guidance, unless other quality assurance procedures are justified as more
appropriate to the monitoring objectives. Data reporting to AQS should include reporting of the
precision and accuracy check results. The TAMS Center provides training on these QA aspects
Final Guidance May?, 2010 41 of 63
-------
of monitoring programs and has developed Turbo-QAPP software approved for use by OAQPS.
Tribal QAPPs developed using this software should be generally approvable.
Many tribes are very concerned about climate change and its impact on tribes. Tribes often
are the first to experience the impact of climate change and are generally less able to address it
than states and local agencies. In FY 2011, OAR will work with tribes as the Agency develops
climate change policies and/or regulations.
Our strategy includes supporting tribal interest in air toxics. Tribes have increased their
participation in air toxics issues, but are limited by availability of funding and resources to assess
the level of impact and risk. However, tribes continue to be concerned about toxics, and often
have disproportional impacts due to subsistence activities and lifestyles. This is particularly true
where local problems may be caused by local and regional sources such as residential wood
smoke, industrial facilities, and mobile sources. This also applies to toxic deposition and
bioaccumulation of persistent bioaccumulative toxins, such as mercury, dioxin, and PCBs. The
229 Alaska Native Villages, many of whom rely on traditional subsistence lifestyles, have
expressed particular concern over local and international toxics, and Arctic peoples are known to
suffer disproportionately high exposures to these toxic and persistent compounds.
We will also work with tribal governments to develop tribal capacity and expertise to directly
participate and represent tribal concerns in local, regional, and statewide efforts to understand
and address air quality concerns.
Finally, to enhance the visibility of the OAR Tribal Program and to further integrate tribal
issues and concerns into EPA's daily programmatic activities, regions should, where appropriate,
provide the tribes with the funding assistance necessary for reasonable participation in regional
and national level conferences, meetings, and planning activities. For example, there are several
national conferences on topics such as monitoring, emission inventories, quality assurance, and
data analysis. There are also a number of strategic planning efforts underway under the auspices
of the Clean Air Act Advisory Committee that could benefit from consistent and meaningful
tribal participation. Such provisions should be added, as appropriate, to the tribal grant
workplans. Tribes and tribal organizations, as our regulatory partners, should also be invited and
encouraged to participate in regional advisory bodies and workgroups to assist EPA in
developing and implementing new regulations and policies wherever those actions may affect
tribal governments as well as state and local authorities.
FY 2011 Priorities
Headquarters
• Provide support to tribes and regions for completion of emissions inventories and their
submission to the Emissions Inventory System (EIS).
• Provide training and technical support to tribes for air quality assessment and monitoring,
including submission of quality assured data into the AQS system.
• Work with regions to provide air quality outreach and training events to tribal staff, as
appropriate.
• Support tribal participation in local, regional and national policy developments and
actions through the National Tribal Air Association.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 42 of 63
-------
• Provide grant and staff support to national tribal organizations to support effective tribal
participation in policy development.
• Provide grant and staff support for training on national CAA policy issues.
• Invite tribes to participate in policy development and implementation workgroups.
• Support training for tribes on the SIP process, where state programs may impact tribal
lands.
• Provide meaningful notice and access to tribes for participation in policy, rule, or
program development that may impact them.
• Support training for tribes on the TAS and TIP processes.
• Review draft FIPs and provide guidance to support Regional Office FIP efforts
• Finalize and support Regional and tribal implementation of the tribal NSR rules.
• Provide support for toxics training and outreach events to tribes and other opportunities
for tribes to participate in air toxics reduction efforts.
• Provide support for training to tribes on voluntary programs such as asthma and indoor
air.
• Provide support for tribal efforts to understand, assess, and respond to indoor air
concerns in Indian country.
• Work with regions to assist interested tribes in implementing voluntary emission control
retrofit programs for existing heavy-duty diesel engines/school buses and wood
stove/hydronic heater changeouts.
• Continue to support tribes and regions with information and training to address wood
smoke emissions, both indoors and out.
• Continue to provide guidance to tribes on planning and implementing air monitoring
programs.
• Continue to support tribal participation in assessment and monitoring activities related to
the atmospheric deposition of mercury on tribal lands.
• Continue to facilitate distribution of information to tribes by maintaining the TribalAir
website and the Tribal Newsletter.
• Support and encourage early and frequent consultation with tribal governments on OAR
actions that may affect them.
• Directly, and working closely with the regions, support tribal efforts to understand,
assess, mitigate and adapt to climate change.
• Work with regions to implement voluntary programs to integrate nontraditional planning
(e.g., land use, transportation, and energy) into air quality management.
Regions
• Provide grant and technical support to interested tribes for the purpose of conducting air
quality management activities.
• Provide support to tribal air quality assessment activities such as emissions inventories,
monitoring, and submission of monitoring data into national databases as appropriate.
• Work with HQ to provide air quality outreach and training events to tribal staff, as
appropriate.
• Provide grant resources and staff support for tribes to participate in Regional and national
level activities.
• Provide support for tribes to be an active part in the SIP process, where state programs
may impact Indian country.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 43 of 63
-------
• Provide grant resources and support to tribes for participation in rule or program
development.
• Provide support for tribes on the TAS and TIP processes and act on TAS and TIP
submittals.
• Use Direct Implementation Tribal Cooperative Agreement (DITCA) authority to directly
implement federal responsibilities as appropriate.
• If necessary, identify areas requiring a FIP development and implementation process.
• Issue Part 71 and pre-construction (PSD) permits.
• Implement and enforce federal standards (NSPS, NESHAP, etc.).
• Work with tribes to implement tribal, CAA, and voluntary emission control programs.
• Work with tribes to implement NSR in Indian country.
• Support tribal capacity building with regard to understanding and addressing air toxics
issues impacting Indian country, as needed or appropriate.
• Support tribal participation in activities related to regional planning and technical
support, particularly as a collaborative effort involving EPA, states, and locals.
• Provide support for outreach events to tribes and other opportunities for tribes to
participate in air toxics reduction efforts.
• Make outreach and training on voluntary programs available to tribes.
• Provide support and technical assistance to tribes to understand and address indoor air
quality concerns.
• Work with HQ and interested tribes in implementing voluntary emission control retrofit
programs for existing heavy-duty diesel engines.
• Work with HQ and interested tribes in implementing woodstove changeout programs.
• Work with HQ to conduct formal consultations with tribal leaders when appropriate.
• Support OTS Tribal Database by regularly inputting appropriate data and ensuring tribal
accomplishments and activities are accurately described.
• Provide support and technical assistance to tribes to address residential wood and coal
burning.
Tribes
• Provide air quality monitoring or assessment data to EPA and/or AQS.
• Work with regions to register minor sources for NSR permit planning.
• Complete and submit emissions inventories to the EIS.
• Attend air quality outreach events; participate in ozone or PM policy development,
and/or regulatory response, as appropriate.
• Participate in regional and national level meetings, conferences, and teleconferences on
CAA policy development and seek training and support to build capability for effective
participation.
• Participate in CAA rules and policy development that may have potential to impact
tribes.
• Submit eligibility determinations under the TAR.
• Submit TIPs to address air quality conditions for lands within the tribes' jurisdiction.
• Assist in FIP development and implementation process, as appropriate.
• Review and test new Emissions Inventory process and EIS components. Provide
feedback to regions.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 44 of 63
-------
Participate in and support the National Tribal Air Association to encourage a strong role
for tribes in the development of activities related to regulations, programs and policy
development.
Provide outreach to tribes on indoor and outdoor air toxics issues.
Participate in training and technical support activities conducted as part of the American
Indian Air Quality Training Program, including attending workshop training both as
students and instructors and assisting tribes in learning from each other.
Participate in training on voluntary programs to address air quality concerns.
Attend indoor air quality training.
Participate in indoor air quality assessment and outreach to tribes.
Implement voluntary emission control retrofit programs for existing heavy-duty diesel
engines and wood stove and hydronic heater changeout campaigns.
Participate in EPA's climate change-related policy and regulatory development activities.
++ End ++
Final Guidance May?, 2010 45 of 63
-------
Climate Protection
Through both regulatory and voluntary efforts, EPA will reduce greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions in ways that promote the President's vision of a clean energy future. Nearly three years
ago, the U.S. Supreme Court ordered EPA to determine, based on available scientific evidence,
whether GHG emissions from motor vehicles endanger public health and welfare. EPA conducted
that inquiry and determined through a public rulemaking that GHG emissions from motor vehicles do
endanger public health and welfare. That finding triggered a Clean Air Act (CAA) mandate to issue
GHG emissions standards for motor vehicles. EPA also has a number of pending rulemaking
petitions and other legal obligations to consider regulating GHGs from a variety of mobile and
stationary sources.
In responding to these obligations, OAR will consider applying the CAA regulatory authority to
GHG emissions in ways that meet our statutory obligations while using common sense approaches
that focus requirements on the largest GHG sources and use multi-pollutant, sector-based strategies.
In combination with our on-going efforts to continually enhance and refocus our voluntary programs,
these actions will encourage cost-effective, energy-efficient operating practices, promote the
development and use of innovative technologies, create new green jobs, and most importantly, reduce
air pollution that threatens human health contributes to climate change.
MANDATORY GREENHOUSE GAS REPORTING RULE
In September 2009, EPA issued a final rule for mandatory GHG reporting from large GHG
emissions sources.9 In developing the reporting requirements, EPA considered the substantial
amount of work already completed and underway in many states, regions and voluntary
programs. The new reporting requirements apply to suppliers of fossil fuel and industrial
chemicals, manufacturers of motor vehicles and engines, as well as large direct emitters of
GHGs. The requirements cover approximately 85% of the nation's GHG emissions, and apply
to roughly 10,000 facilities. The first annual reports will be submitted to EPA in 2011 for the
calendar year 2010, except for vehicle and engine manufacturers, which begin reporting for
model year 2011. Some source categories included in the proposed rule are still under review.
A "High Priority Performance Goal" under development for OAR is to make the reported data
publically-available by June 15, 2011.
The Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance is developing an implementation
strategy for the reporting rule that will provide guidance to regions on compliance monitoring
and assistance activities, and guidance on an appropriate enforcement response to support the
integrity of the monitoring and reporting system.
' Final rule and related information available at http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/ghgrulemaking.html
Final Guidance May?, 2010 46 of 63
-------
FY2011 Priorities
Headquarters
• Continue a comprehensive outreach and training effort with covered facilities,
including the identification of facilities that are likely to meet the applicability
thresholds.
• Complete the development, testing, dissemination and training on the electronic
reporting system.
• Work with states on ways to leverage data reported to multiple jurisdictions for the
development and implementation of programs
• Carry out a comprehensive QA/QC and verification program on the data reported
March 31,2011.
• Provide support to the regions in identifying and listing reporting facilities, and in
outreach to facilities that are priorities within specific regions.
• Make the reported data publically-available by June 15, 2011 (High Priority
Performance Goal).
Regions
Outreach, training, and facility identification
• Identify and develop a list of facilities that may be required to report and, coordinating
with HQ, develop a strategy to notify these facilities. Approximately 10,000 facilities
meet the applicability requirements of the GHG reporting rule and will need to report
emissions by March 31, 2011.
• Participate in EPA-sponsored training sessions and present on the GHG reporting rule
in other meetings, conferences, etc., in order to reach important targeted audiences
(e.g., industry associations, multi-state meetings, GHG conferences). Since different
industries may be prominent in specific regions (e.g., pulp and paper in Region 4), the
regional emphases for training and outreach should reflect these differences.
Electronic Reporting System
• EPA will operate training sessions and a help desk for its electronic reporting tool. To
supplement this effort, regions should develop expertise in the reporting tool so that
they can respond to questions and assist reporters. This effort will be greatest during
the second quarter of FY 2011.
• Work with HQ in the verification process to follow up with specific facilities on
questions raised during the early stages of review, and potentially with site visits later
in the process. The reporting rule will use centralized EPA verification of reported
data, taking advantage of electronic reporting and automated checks, in combination
with direct follow up to a subset of facilities and occasional site visits. EPA will need
to coordinate with certain states at various steps in the verification process in order to
Final Guidance May?, 2010 47 of 63
-------
leverage all available information for specific facilities. Again, the regions should
consider the prominent industries in their parts of the country in developing expertise
for verification.
PROPOSED PSD AND TITLE V GHG TAILORING RULE
In September 2009, EPA proposed the Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V
Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule, which specified new thresholds for GHG emissions to
determine when CAA permits under the New Source Review and Title V operating permits
programs would be required.10 The proposed thresholds would tailor these permit programs to
limit which facilities would be required to obtain permits and would cover nearly 70% of the
nation's largest stationary source GHG emitters—including power plants, refineries, and cement
production facilities, while shielding small businesses and farms from permitting requirements.
As noted in the State and Local Air Quality Management section of the Outdoor Air chapter, the
Agency has requested additional grant resources to help state, local, and tribal agencies with
appropriate permitting authority enhance their capacity to adequately assume responsibilities in
this area.
FY 2011 Priorities
Headquarters
• Develop sector- and source-specific guidance that will help permitting authorities and
affected sources better understand program requirements for GHGs, GHG emissions for
the selected source categories, methods for estimating those emissions, control strategies
for GHG emissions, and available GHG measurement and monitoring techniques.
Regions
Work with HQ to assist states in evaluating and building the permitting capacity
necessary to address affected sources of GHGs.
VEHICLE GHG STANDARDS
In September 2009, EPA and the Department of Transportation's National Highway Safety
Administration (NHTSA) proposed a national program that would dramatically reduce
greenhouse gas emissions and improve fuel economy for new cars and trucks sold in the U.S.n
The combined EPA and NHTSA standards that make up the proposed program would apply to
passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles, covering model years
2012 through 2016. They require these vehicles to meet an estimated combined average
emissions level of 250 grams of carbon dioxide per mile, equivalent to 35.5 miles per gallon if
10 Fact sheet available at http://www.epa.gov/NSR/fs20090930action.html: proposed rule available at
http://www.epa.gov/NSR/documents/GHGTailoringProposal.pdf
11 Proposed rule and related information available at http://epa.gov/otaq/climate/regulations.htm
Final Guidance May?, 2010 48 of 63
-------
the automobile industry were to meet this carbon dioxide level solely through fuel economy
improvements. Together, these proposed standards will cut carbon dioxide emissions by an
estimated 950 million metric tons and 1.8 billion barrels of oil over the lifetime of the vehicles
sold under the program (model years 2012-2016). EPA expects to issue final standards for these
vehicles in March 2010.
Also, as required by the Supreme Court's decision, EPA is currently developing potential
GHG standards for heavy-duty vehicles. EPA expects to propose a rule in 2010. In addition,
EPA has received 10 rulemaking petitions to consider regulating GHG emissions from other
categories of mobile sources. Many of those petitions were submitted two or more years ago.
To respond to those petitions, EPA must investigate the possibility of proposing standards for
those categories, as well as standards for model years after 2016.
FY 2011 Priorities
• Begin implementation of the standards for light-duty vehicles, covering model years
2012 through 2016 (High Priority Performance Goal).
• Promulgate a final rule to control GHG emissions from heavy-duty engines.
• Respond to rulemaking petitions and examine the need to regulate GHGs from additional
categories of mobile sources.
RENEWABLE FUEL STANDARD PROGRAM
In February 2010, EPA finalized revisions to the National Renewable Fuel Standard program
(commonly known as the RFS program).12 This rule makes changes to the Renewable Fuel
Standard program as required by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA).
The revised requirements establish new specific annual volume standards for cellulosic biofuel,
biomass-based diesel, advanced biofuel, and total renewable fuel that must be used in
transportation fuel. The revised requirements also include new definitions and criteria for both
renewable fuels and the feedstocks used to produce them, including new GHG thresholds as
determined by lifecycle analysis. The requirements for RFS will apply to domestic and foreign
producers and importers of renewable fuel used in the U.S.
FY2011 Priorities
Headquarters
• Begin implementing the new Renewable Fuel Standards (RFS2) and other actions
required by the Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of 2005 and the Energy Independence and
Security Act (EISA) of 2007, including outreach to stakeholders and a National Academy
of Sciences review of the final lifecycle methodology. Develop a rule to address the
impacts of renewable fuels on emissions (Anti-backsliding rule).
• Continue to implement a real-time reporting system to ensure compliance with the RFS2
program.
12 Final rule and related information available at http://www.epa.gov/OMS/renewablefuels/
Final Guidance May?, 2010 49 of 63
-------
• Continue a multi-year testing program aimed at evaluating the environmental impacts of
renewable fuels.
• Continue our on-going conversations with states, local governments, and other groups on
our ongoing analyses and rule developments related to the Renewable Fuel Standard.
POTENTIAL NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
EPA has a number of pending legal obligations to consider action under CAA section 111 for
several source categories of GHGs. EPA is assessing the potential development of GHG
performance standards for new stationary sources and guidelines for state regulation of existing
sources, of certain sizes and within certain industrial categories. These New Source
Performance Standards could be an effective mechanism to reduce GHG emissions from major
industrial sources.
CLEAN AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGY
EPA manages the Clean Automotive Technology (CAT) and the Fuel Cell and Hydrogen
programs, which develop advanced clean and fuel-efficient vehicle technology to better protect
the environment and save energy. These programs are designed to help recognize and remove
barriers in the marketplace and to more rapidly deploy cost-effective low GHG technologies into
the transportation sector of the economy.13
FY2011 Priorities
Headquarters
• Continue the transfer of EPA's advances in hydraulic hybrid technologies (promote
adoption of technology and technical assistance), providing continuity in EPA's
commitments to the truck and fleet industry for development and deployment. In
addition, the program will continue the transfer of EPA's advances in clean diesel
combustion technologies, and promote the adoption of technology and technical
assistance by providing continuity in EPA's commitments to the automotive and truck
industry for development and deployment.
• Continue field tests currently underway and planned for hydraulic-hybrid and clean
engine technologies achieving better fuel economy than the typical baseline vehicles.
• Continue demonstration of the effectiveness of the CAT Program's high-efficiency, low
GHG, clean combustion E-85/M-85 alcohol engine in a series hydraulic hybrid vehicle.
• Continue work on our hydraulic hybrid / clean engine demonstration partnership with the
California South Coast Air Quality Management District. The work will demonstrate the
low GHG potential possible from a shuttle bus equipped with series hydraulic hybrid
! (For more information see: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/technology
Final Guidance May?, 2010 50 of 63
-------
technology and powered by the world's first gasoline homogeneous-charge,
compression-ignition (HCCI) engine which gets diesel efficiency from gasoline fuel
without the need for costly diesel aftertreatment. The partnership will also begin its
initial work on ways to demonstrate the use of clean low GHG renewable fuel with
hydraulic hybrid vehicles.
VOLUNTARY CLIMATE PROTECTION PROGRAMS
This program includes voluntary domestic and international programs, other than clean
vehicle technology, that address GHG and climate change issues. Efforts are aimed at
reducing emissions of GHGs and mitigating the effects of global climate change on the
environment and human health while growing the economy. This program includes
implementation of the new Memorandum of Understanding regarding the ENERGY STAR
program with the Department of Energy (DOE) signed in September 2009. Under the
agreement with DOE, EPA will manage the specification process for more than 60 product
categories, the new and existing homes programs, and the commercial and industrial
programs. This includes more frequent product specification revisions to ensure appropriate
stringency.
EPA's strategy is to:
• Continue the successful ENERGY STAR partnerships in the residential and commercial
buildings sector by adding new products to the ENERGY STAR family.
• Raise awareness of the ENERGY STAR label for products, buildings, and homes, and
promote superior energy management to public and private sector organizations of all
sizes in all regions of the country.
• Continue building on the success of voluntary programs in the industrial sector. This
includes:
o Enhancing the rate of energy and resource efficiency improvements through the
ENERGY STAR and WasteWise programs.
o Promoting the ENERGY STAR label for industrial plants and expanding
opportunities to provide energy benchmarking tools to industry.
o Cost-effectively keeping emissions of methane at 1990 levels or below through
2010.
o Cost-effectively limiting emissions of the more potent greenhouse gases (HFCs,
PFCs, SF6), and facilitating the use of clean energy technologies and purchases of
renewable energy.
• Reduce international GHGs through the Methane to Markets Partnership by promoting
and deploying cost-effective methane recovery technologies among other countries and
the U.S. private sector.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 51 of 63
-------
• Increase the use of renewable energy throughout the public and private sector by
promoting membership in Climate Leaders and in the Green Power Partnership,
particularly for larger organizations.
• Promote energy efficiency and the generation of increased amounts of renewable energy
through a variety of utility-focused programs.
• Continue the SmartWay Transport Partnership to increase energy efficiency and lower
greenhouse gas and other emissions from freight transportation. This includes:
o Increasing the market penetration of advanced heavy-duty diesel tractor and
trailer technologies.
o Implementing innovative financing strategies, and developing a supply chain
system to allow companies to select, measure, and certify the environmental
performance of goods movement across multiple freight modes.
o Enhancing existing SmartWay GHG measurement and tracking tools so they can
be used to certify emission reductions from freight transport activities.
o Implementing targeted GHG reduction efforts in specific freight transport sectors
including ports, borders, and freight distribution hubs (including those located
near disadvantaged communities).
o Demonstrating SmartWay as an international role model through partnership
programs and outreach efforts.
• Help consumers and businesses more easily identify light and heavy duty vehicles that
deliver superior fuel economy and emissions by identifying vehicles that meet the
SmartWay criteria for superior environmental performance.
• Work with financial experts to identify and develop tools, resources, and programs for
states and regional authorities to implement innovative financing programs to deliver
lower cost financing to diesel truck and nonroad equipment buyers (many of who are
low-income and minority owner operations and businesses) for the purpose of upgrading
the environmental performance of their diesel trucks or equipment.
• Continue to develop, test, and demonstrate innovative fuel-efficient and clean vehicle and
engine technologies, including: enhancing the SmartWay technology verification
program to provide reliable information on a wider range of low carbon retrofit
technologies; and ongoing work with auto and commercial vehicle industry partners to
transfer EPA's engineering expertise and advanced technologies to commercial
application.
FY 2011 Priorities for Regions
Promote GHG reduction programs and activities to stakeholders. This may include but is not
limited to the following:
• Participate in implementation of the Climate Showcase Communities grant program.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 52 of 63
-------
Make commitments to procure ENERGY STAR-qualified products and encourage other
organizations to do the same.
Encourage tribal governments and communities to be partners in GHG activities and
participate in and benefit from ongoing coordinated efforts and outreach programs.
Rate the energy performance of buildings using EPA's national energy performance
rating system, apply for the ENERGY STAR label for the qualifying buildings, and
determine improvement plans for those that do not currently qualify; and encourage other
organizations to do the same.
Encourage organizations to join the ENERGY STAR Buildings Challenge and promote a
10% or more reduction in energy use in buildings, and assist local governments that have
already joined to implement the Challenge.
Ensure that new building designs are "Designed to Earn the ENERGY STAR" where
applicable, and encourage others to do the same.
Promote the use of the ENERGY STAR@Home, ENERGY STAR Yard Stick, and Home
Energy Advisor web-tools to help homeowners make informed decisions about energy
efficiency for their homes.
Educate trucking companies and shippers about the SmartWay Partnership program and
encourage them to join the program.
Encourage major companies and organizations headquartered in the Region to join
Climate Leaders and the Green Power Partnership.
Promote the integration of integrate energy efficiency and clean energy into air quality
plans (i.e., SIPs).
Promote the recovery and use of methane as a clean energy source through EPA's
methane partnership programs (e.g., landfills, agricultural waste, coal mines, and oil/gas
operations).
Operate pilot programs to use commercially-available advanced technology in fleets
(such as state/municipal vehicles, school buses, or refuse vehicles) to produce cost-
effective emissions and fuel consumption reductions.
++ End ++
Final Guidance May?, 2010 53 of 63
-------
Stratospheric Ozone
As a signatory to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer
(Montreal Protocol), the U.S. is obligated to regulate and enforce its terms domestically. In
accordance with this international treaty and related Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements, EPA
will continue to implement the domestic rulemaking agenda for the reduction and control of
ozone-depleting substances (ODS), such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs),
hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) and methyl bromide, and enforce rules controlling their
production, import, and emission.
Implementation involves a combination of marketable allowances, requirements for servicing
of ODS equipment, bans on non-essential products, and listing of alternatives to ozone-depleting
substances that reduce overall risk to the environment and human health. We will strengthen
outreach efforts to ensure efficient and effective compliance, and continue to identify and
promote safer alternatives to curtail stratospheric ozone depletion and support climate protection
goals. To help reduce international emissions, particularly in light of the more aggressive
phasedown requirements adopted by Montreal Protocol signatories in September 2007, we will
assist developing countries through the transfer of technology and U.S. expertise such as in the
development and implementation of cap-and-trade licensing systems.
Because the ozone layer is not expected to recover until the middle of this century at the
earliest, the public will continue to be exposed to higher levels of UV radiation than existed prior
to the use and emission of ODS. Recognizing this fact and the public's current sun-exposure
practices, EPA will continue education and outreach efforts to encourage behavioral changes as
the primary means of reducing UV-related health risks.
DOMESTIC PROGRAMS
EPA leads regulatory and voluntary programs to restore the ozone layer and reduce public
health risk. For 2010, EPA's domestic strategy for stratospheric ozone protection will focus on:
• Undertaking measures to ensure the successful transition of industries to non-ozone-
depleting alternatives to class II substances (HCFCs), which beginning in 2010 are
subject to further consumption, production, and use controls under the Montreal Protocol
and CAA.
• Limiting production of class I substances such as CFC-11, CFC-12, and methyl bromide
to uses identified as critical or essential under the Montreal Protocol.
• Listing new alternatives to ODS with less overall risk to human health and the
environment.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 54 of 63
-------
FY 2011 Milestones and Priorities
• Administer the critical use exemption for production of methyl bromide as allowed under
the Montreal Protocol.
• Allocate production and consumption allowances for HCFCs to ensure U.S. compliance
with caps under the Montreal Protocol.
• Continue the combination of regulatory and voluntary activities to ensure safe handling,
recovery, and disposal of ozone-depleting refrigerants, including implementation of the
GreenChill and Responsible Appliance Disposal voluntary partnerships that build on the
regulatory requirements established under CAA Title VI.
• Expand the list of alternatives with overall better risk profiles under the Significant New
Alternatives Program (SNAP) to foster the transition to safer alternatives.
• Carry out enforcement actions related to programs under Title VI of the CAA including
servicing of motor vehicle air conditioners, recovery and reuse of ODS during use and
disposal, and avoid illegal imports of ODS. For additional information, see the National
Program Guidance issued by the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance.
MULTILATERAL FUND
This program includes the Multilateral Fund, which promotes international compliance with
the Montreal Protocol by financing the incremental cost of converting existing industries in
developing countries to cost-effective, ozone-friendly technology. Our strategy is to continue to
support the Ozone Secretariat's Multilateral Fund, which provides resources to developing
nations to facilitate their transition to ozone-safe alternatives. In 2011 we will focus on:
• Maximizing developing country reductions in ODS production by moving aggressively
from a project-by-project approach to a national phase-out strategy approach.
• Accelerating the shift to CFC alternatives by accelerating the closure of CFC
manufacturers in developing countries.
• Increasing support to developing country institutions to enable effective implementation
of policy measures.
++ End ++
Final Guidance May?, 2010 55 of 63
-------
Indoor Environments
EPA addresses indoor air quality issues by developing and implementing voluntary outreach
and partnership programs that inform and educate the public about indoor air quality and actions
that can reduce potential risks in homes, schools, and workplaces. EPA provides guidance on
addressing environmental triggers of asthma, mold contamination and indoor air toxics, such as
radon, environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), and particulate matter. EPA supports states, tribes,
and communities in developing and implementing comprehensive multi-stakeholder indoor air
toxics reduction efforts. EPA works with other federal agencies to provide guidance and
assistance on how to reduce the exposure levels of these contaminants in all communities.
Through the State Indoor Radon Grant (SIRG) Program, EPA helps states that have not yet
established the basic elements of an effective radon assessment and mitigation program, and
supports innovation and expansion in states that already have programs.
Through these voluntary programs, EPA disseminates information and works with national,
international, state, tribal, and local governments; industry and professional groups; and the
public to promote actions to reduce exposures to potentially harmful levels of indoor air
pollutants including radon, asthma triggers including ETS, and mold contamination in homes.
EPA also transfers technology by providing detailed guidance on indoor air-related building
design, operation, and maintenance practices to building owners, building managers, and school
facility managers, and easy-to-use tools to educators and school facility managers. A key focus
area is on the environmental management of asthma triggers in homes and schools.
In 2011, EPA will ramp up efforts to provide healthy school environments by increasing
outreach to community-based asthma programs, using existing guidance (IAQ Tools for
Schools) and by expanding the Communities in Action for Asthma-Friendly Environments
Campaign. Through greater implementation of the existing programs at HQ and expanded efforts
in the regions, this initiative will deliver effective asthma management strategies to at-risk and
underserved communities and schools across the nation by substantially expanding the current
Communities in Action Network of 400 community-based programs and rapidly spreading best
practice strategies to communities across the nation.
Our strategies for improving indoor air quality and increasing the number of people breathing
healthier indoor air are implemented through two priority areas: (1) indoor environmental
pollutants and triggers which cause or exacerbate respiratory-related illnesses, and (2) radon.
REDUCE RISKS FROM INDOOR ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTANTS AND ASTHMA
TRIGGERS
This program takes both a pollutant-focused and place-based approach to reduce risk at
locations where people are exposed to indoor contaminants. As its top priorities, EPA and its
partners design and implement voluntary guidance, education, outreach, training, and incentive
programs and activities to: reduce exposure to environmental triggers of asthma (i.e., ETS, dust
mites, pests, molds, nitrogen dioxide, and pet dander), help communities deliver effective
Final Guidance May?, 2010 56 of 63
-------
comprehensive asthma care, and effectively manage indoor air quality in homes, schools and
office buildings.
Our strategy includes: implementing a national, multi-faceted asthma education and outreach
program to improve and expand the delivery of comprehensive asthma care; an ETS program
primarily focused on protecting young children from ETS exposure by collaborating with
federal, state, and local organizations on promoting smoke-free homes and cars; and a national
education and outreach program to inform the public, schools, school districts, educators, and
building professionals about the importance of creating and maintaining healthy indoor
environments in homes, schools, and workplaces. EPA has identified the reduction of asthma
attacks as a National Environmental Justice Priority. Our strategy is targeted to improve the
environmental health outcomes of people including segments of at-risk populations that are
socio-economically disadvantaged or disproportionately impacted such as children and low-
income individuals. (Supports Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goal 2 (see Appendix
G).) Our program relies on several key implementation/educational tools:
• National public awareness and media campaigns;
• Community-based outreach and education, (e.g., educating caregivers of children on
environmental triggers of asthma and exposure to ETS);
• Sound, user-friendly guidance tailored to the program's varied constituencies;
• Enhancement and application of programmatic support data; and
• Knowledge and technology transfer (e.g. training health care providers on asthma trigger
management strategies, building community capacity to deliver comprehensive asthma
care).
FY 2011 Priorities for the Regions
• Support the expansion of the Communities in Action for Asthma Friendly Environments
Campaign through increased support for at risk communities, bringing these communities
into the Communities in Action Network, providing targeted training and outreach to
underserved communities and schools;
• Serve as the local, community-based point of contact to disseminate information and
foster implementation of the indoor air programs;
• Work with national partner affiliates, state, tribal, and local partners, and coalitions to
reduce risks from indoor pollutants and asthma triggers;
• Work with school districts and other school organizations to promote adoption of
effective indoor air quality management programs in schools;
• Manage grants to reduce risks from indoor pollutants and asthma triggers, particularly in
homes, schools, and child care settings.
RADON
The voluntary radon program aims to significantly reduce the number of radon-induced lung
cancer deaths in the U.S. The national goal is to approximately double number of lives saved
through radon risk reduction within the next five years. The program's primary focus is on
Final Guidance May?, 2010 57 of 63
-------
radon risk reduction in homes. EPA uses information dissemination, social marketing
techniques, and partnerships with influential public health and environmental organizations to
drive action, primarily thru the SIRG program, at the state, tribal, and local level.
The two primary methods to achieve our risk reduction goals are:
• Building healthier green homes with radon-resistant new construction; and
• Reducing radon in existing homes.
A third method is to reduce the risk to children and adults in schools:
• Reducing radon in schools and building new schools with radon-reducing features.
The principal mechanisms to achieve these results are:
• Builders voluntarily building radon-resistant new homes;
• State and local governments adopting building codes that include radon reduction;
• Homeowners with high radon levels voluntarily fixing their homes;
• Sellers/buyers fixing homes within real estate transactions; and
• Schools reducing radon through "IAQ Tools for Schools" or other programs.
State Indoor Radon Grants (SIRG)
The SIRG Program distributes state assistance grant (STAG) funds under the authority of
Section 306 of TSCA (Title III). Details on the SIRG Program can be found in EPA's State and
Tribal Indoor Radon Grants Program Guidance and Handbook, located at:
http://www.epa.gov/radon/pdfs/guidance_and_handbook.pdf. See also:
http ://www. epa. gov/radon/sirgprogram.html.
Recipients of FY 2011 SIRG funds should emphasize radon risk reduction by: (1) increasing
testing and mitigation of existing homes by consumers, homeowners, non-profit partnerships,
and real estate professionals; (2) builders voluntarily including radon-reducing features in new
homes, including the use of green-building standards; (3) promoting the adoption or revision of
state-local building codes for radon-reducing features; and, (4) promoting public education and
awareness. Funded projects should clearly result in the following outcomes:
• New homes built with radon-reducing features;
• Testing and mitigation of existing homes;
• Testing and mitigation of existing schools;
• Building new schools with radon-reducing features; and
• Other projects and activities that clearly contribute to achieving the preceding outcomes.
EPA is considering a revision to the grant allotment methodology for the SIRG program. Any
new methodology would likely begin to be implemented in FY 2012. EPA and SIRG recipients
must continue working towards the bottom-line outcomes above. SIRG workplans should reflect
radon program priorities and measurable results and outcomes.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 58 of 63
-------
A preliminary FY 2011 regional allotment will be made available for review after release of
the Final FY 2011 National Program Guidance. The HQ SIRG Program contact is Philip Jalbert
(202-343-9431. jalbert.philip@epa.gov).
FY 2011 Priorities for the Regions
• Increase the number of homes and schools mitigated; and new homes built with radon-
reducing features
• Report on radon non-commitment indicators at the end of the year in ACS
• Negotiate yearly workplans with states and tribes and track progress throughout the year
through quarterly reports and frequent communication
• Encourage the timely expenditure of grant funds (older funds first);
• Participate in the national radon meeting;
• Design and run regional stakeholder meetings that involve states and industry
• Support the Radon Leaders Saving Lives campaign; and
• Use Radon Action Month as a way to drive action throughout the year.
++ End ++
Final Guidance May?, 2010 59 of 63
-------
Radiation Protection
EPA works with federal, state, tribal, and local agencies to prevent public exposure to
harmful levels of radiation in the environment. The Agency assesses exposure risks, manages
radioactive releases and exposures, ensures proper management of radioactive materials, and
provides the public with information about radiation and its hazards. EPA also maintains a high
level of preparedness to respond to radiological emergencies and potential acts of terrorism.
EPA's strategies for radiation include:
• Radiation Protection;
• Radiation Emergency Response Preparedness; and
• Homeland Security and Emergency Response and Recovery
EPA continues to improve radioactive waste management through guidance, technical tools,
assessment, and regulatory amendments as necessary and radiation-specific analytical and
technical support. EPA also continues its commitment to Emergency Response/Homeland
Security.
EPA's Radiation Program continues to integrate radiation data into the Agency's information
systems and make radiation information more accessible to the public. The program is
enhancing the national environmental radiation monitoring system (RadNet) to better respond to
radiation emergencies and prepare for potential terrorist threats and continues programs to
provide guidance and tools to other federal agencies, as well as state, tribal, and local
governments, our stakeholders, and partners. Using sound science, we continue efforts to create
and enhance voluntary programs to better track radioactive materials, find alternatives to
radiation sources in industry, and improve disposal options for radioactive sources in commerce.
RADIATION PROTECTION
This program includes activities for radiation clean up, federal guidance, risk modeling, Clean
Materials, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), radiation air toxics, or National Emissions for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs), technologically-enhanced naturally-occurring radioactive
material (TENORM), radiation waste management, radioactive and mixed-waste operations, and
laboratory analyses.
Using a collaborative strategy, EPA works with the public, industry, states, tribes, and other
governmental agencies to inform and educate people about radiation risks and promote actions
that reduce human exposure. EPA also provides radiation guidance and tools and develops
regulations as appropriate, to control radiation releases. Key programmatic activities include:
• Promoting the safety of the U.S. and international metal supply by preventing future
losses of radioactive materials including sealed sources;
• Ensuring continued compliance with EPA regulations and EPA oversight for DOE waste
disposal activities at the WIPP;
Final Guidance May?, 2010 60 of 63
-------
Promoting the reduction and management of radiation risks in a consistent and safe
manner at Superfund, DOE, DOD, state, local, tribal, and other federal sites;
Maintaining appropriate methods to manage radioactive releases and exposures including
evaluating remediation technologies for radioactively contaminated sites;
Assessing exposure risks and providing information about radiation and its hazards;
Evaluating the human health and environmental risks from radiation exposure and
mitigating impacts to the public;
Providing national-level guidance on the risks posed by radioactive materials in the
environment;
Enhancing voluntary programs to track radioactive materials more effectively, find
alternatives to radiation sources in industry, and improve disposal options for radioactive
sources in commerce;
Providing a national monitoring program for environmental radioactivity;
Improving EPA, state, and commercial radioanalytical capacity and capabilities:
o Providing analytical capability to evaluate radioactive and mixed waste
concentrations in all environmental media;
o Providing improved methods and practices for sampling and assessing radioactive
material in the environment; and
o Providing reference laboratory support to review new methods and confirm other
laboratory analyses.
FY 2011 Priorities
Additional quantities of radioactive waste certified by EPA as properly disposed will be
deposited at the WIPP in 2011;
EPA radiation laboratories will improve analytical capacity through updated technology
and methods;
EPA will improve state radiation laboratory capabilities and capacity through training
and evaluation;
EPA will respond to issues related to the resurgence of nuclear power, including the
development of new nuclear power plants;
EPA will respond to increased uranium extraction and processing, including Regional
review of extraction facility Environmental Impact Statements and permits;
EPA will publish a proposed regulation implementing the Uranium Mill Tailings
Radiation Control Act at 40 CFR 192;
EPA will determine if its review of 40 CFR Part 61, Subpart W will result in a revised
regulation; a positive determination will result in a proposed regulation;
Laboratories will support Regional remediation projects;
Regions will continue to serve as the local, community-based point of contact to
disseminate information on EPA's radiation protection program;
Regions will continue to coordinate regional radiation issues among Regional Offices;
Regions will continue to implement regulatory programs (e.g., radiological NESHAPs);
Regions will continue as requested, to provide technical support to state radiation, solid
waste, environmental and health programs and headquarters radiation regulatory, policy
and technical workgroups;
Final Guidance May?, 2010 61 of 63
-------
• Regions will continue to provide technical support to Superfund;
• Regions will continue to work with states on issues involving TENORM that include
issues associated with mining legacy waste disposal and water treatment residuals.
RADIATION EMERGENCY RESPONSE PREPAREDNESS
This program includes federal preparedness activities, ORIA programmatic readiness,
Radiological Emergency Response Team (RERT) personnel and equipment readiness,
development and participation in exercises, training and outreach, radiological emergency
response guidance, extensive laboratory capability for radioactive and mixed waste analyses, and
RadNet, EPA's national environmental radiation monitoring system.
Using a collaborative strategy, EPA works with tribes, federal, state and local agencies to
ensure that the appropriate parties are fully informed and prepared to respond should an incident
involving radiation occur. EPA's key activities supporting radiation response preparedness
include:
• Preparing to respond to incidents involving radioactive materials through training,
infrastructure development, regular exercises, and field experience;
• Issuing Protective Action Guides;
• Coordinating with other organizations to ensure thorough response and preparedness
planning;
• Providing radioanalytical laboratory capabilities to assess radioactive contamination
during all phases of an incident;
• Providing national, near-real time data on airborne radioactive material concentrations;
• Supporting nationwide development of increased laboratory capacity and capability; and
• Providing waste disposal options for wastes resulting from a radioactive dispersal device
(ROD).
FY 2011 Priorities
• EPA's Radiological Emergency Response Team (RERT) will maintain its high level of
team readiness;
• Laboratories will support urgent regional removal operations;
• RERT staff will support regions with training and at exercises;
• Regions will continue to serve as the local, community-based point of contact to
disseminate information on EPA's radiation response and preparedness program,
activities, and capabilities. As appropriate, regions should:
o Provide technical support to state radiation control programs;
o Support EPA's radiation emergency response operations, including the
assignment of personnel to serve as Regional Radiation Advisor and RERT
Liaison;
o Participate in radiological response exercises; and
o Support radiological response training to increase the capacity of the Agency's
Response Support Corps.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 62 of 63
-------
HOMELAND SECURITY: PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE, AND RECOVERY
EPA will continue coordinating homeland security activities across the Agency, with the
Department of Homeland Security and other federal agencies to ensure consistency with the
National Response Framework.
EPA's strategy for Homeland Security Preparedness, Response, and Recovery builds upon
the efforts discussed under Radiation Response Preparedness. In addition to overall coordination
activities, EPA has significantly upgraded its environmental monitoring network for radiation
(RadNet) by expanding its ambient radiation monitoring capabilities. RadNet provides EPA data
on ambient levels of radiation in the environment, with data for radiological emergency response
assessments, and data for public officials and the general public.
Reference laboratories serve as an authoritative source in the Environmental Response
Laboratory Network (ERLN) for method development, verification, and validation. EPA's
National Air and Radiation Environmental Laboratory (NAREL) will continue to serve as the
Agency's radiological reference laboratory. The Agency will also continue to upgrade its
radiological laboratory response capability which will include a network of "go-to" public and
private sector laboratories to ensure a minimal level of surge capacity for radiological terrorism
incidents.
FY2011 Priorities
• Regions will continue to provide leadership in coordinating inquiries from RadNet
monitor site personnel and station operators and serve as the local, community-based
point of contact to disseminate information on EPA's national radiation monitoring
system.
• The Agency will continue its pilot project to improve state radiological laboratory
capacity through provision of additional laboratory instruments, training, proficiency
testing and audits of the selected state laboratories.
++ End ++
Final Guidance May?, 2010 63 of 63
-------
Appendix A
Appendix A - Performance Measures
Office of Air & Radiation
Note: Bracketed text in the table below is explanatory text that is included in this appendix to provide clarifying information about the performance measure. Within the
Annual Commitment System database, this text appears in the Explanation/Comment field.
ACS
Code
OAQPS
N001
OAQPS
N002
OAQPS
N003
OAQPS
N004
OAQPS
N005
OAQPS
N07
OAQPS
N08
OAQPS
N09
OAQPS
N10
OAQPS
Nil
OAQPS
N29
Measure Text
Percentage reduction in population- weighted ambient concentration of ozone in all monitored counties from 2003 baseline. [HQ reports
this measure.]
Percentage reduction in population-weighted ambient concentration of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) in all monitored counties from 2003
baseline. [HQ reports this measure.]
Cumulative percentage reduction in the number of days with Air Quality Index (AQI) values over 100 since 2003, weighted by population
and AQI value. [HQ reports this measure.]
Cumulative percentage reduction in the average number of days during the ozone season that the ozone standard is exceeded in baseline
nonattainment areas, weighted by population. [HQ reports this measure.]
Percentage improvement in the number of days to process State Implementation Plan revisions weighted by complexity. [HQ reports this
measure.]
Number of final rulemaking actions on PM2.5 SIPs (due April 2008) consistent with the annual SIP processing goal.
Number of final rulemaking actions taken on regional haze SIPs consistent with the annual SIP processing goal.
Number of final rulemaking actions taken on redesignation requests for CO, SO2, PM10, and lead areas, consistent with the annual SIP
processing goal.
Number of final rulemaking actions taken on redesignation requests for 8-hour ozone, consistent with the annual SIP processing goal.
Number of final rulemaking actions taken on redesignation requests for PM2. 5, consistent with the annual SIP processing goal.
Number of completed voluntary reclassifications for 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas.
Non-
Cmmit
Ind
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
State
Grant
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
National
Target
10%
5%
29%
23%
-2.40%
58 actions
(39 areas)
53 states &
territories
Sum of Bids
Sum of Bids
Sum of Bids
Sum of Bids
Final Guidance May 7, 2010
Final Appendix A - Page 1 of 7
-------
Appendix A
ACS
Code
OAQPS
N30
OAQPS
N31
OAQPS
N32
OAQPS
N33
OAQPS
M06
OAQPS
MOV
OAQPS
M08
OAQPS
M09
OAQPS
M10
OAQPS
Mil
OAQPS
M12
OAQPS
M18
Measure Text
Percentage of newly violating areas/counties that region is targeting for developing appropriate actions to bring designated attainment
areas into compliance with the NAAQS.
Number of states or local agencies developing and/or commencing implementation of innovative and voluntary emission reduction
projects.
Number of completed attainment determination actions for 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas, including mandatory reclassifications, clean
air data requests, and one-year extension requests.
Number of final rulemaking actions taken on SIPs for 0.08 ppm 8-hour ozone for moderate areas that were formerly subpart 1 or subpart 2
marginal areas reclassified to moderate.
Percentage of state and local monitoring agency certification requests region evaluates and forwards to HQ when deemed adequate. [Note:
CY 2010 annual data certifications are due May 1, 201 1 .]
Percentage of required Technical Systems Audits conducted to achieve an audit of each organization within a 3-year period.
Percentage of state and local annual monitoring plans reviewed and approved within 120 days when network changes are proposed.
Percentage of 2nd and later Approved Regional Method (ARM) requests acted on by the region in accordance with HQ guidance.
Percentage of affected entities that operate monitors in accordance with Part 58, grant terms, and QAPP.
Percentage of affected entities who submit data to AQS in accordance with Part 58.
Percentage of AQS quarterly data reviews completed and resolved for timeliness and completeness.
Percentage of NATTS Technical Systems Audits the region participates in over a 3-year period.
Non-
Cmmit
Ind
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
State
Grant
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
National
Target
100%
No Target
Sum of Bids
Sum of Bids
100%
All regions
meet once in
3-year goal
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
All regions
meet 50%
goal
Final Guidance May 7, 2010
Final Appendix A - Page 2 of 7
-------
Appendix A
ACS
Code
OAQPS
M19
OAQPS
M20
OAQPS
M22
OAQPS
P001
OAQPS
P06
OAQPS
P09
OAQPS
Pll
OAQPS
P12
OAQPS
P13
OAQPS
P14
OAQPS
P19
OAQPS
P20
NEW
Measure Text
Percentage of community-scale air toxics ambient monitoring programs for which region will review QA requirements and ensure
measurement consistency with NATTS when appropriate.
Percentage of affected entities that operate NATTS in accordance with national guidance and QAPPs.
Percentage of 201 1 Annual Monitoring Plans reviewed for required new and/or modification to existing population- and source-oriented
lead monitoring sites.
Percentage of major NSR permits issued within one year of receiving a complete permit application. [HQ reports this measure]
Percentage of Title V program evaluations conducted and reports completed within the fiscal year.
Percentage of state/local major NSR/PSD permits reviewed by region for new and modified sources to ensure consistent implementation
of the NSR program.
Percentage of permitting authorities reporting complete Part 70 TOPs data.
Percentage of Part 71 significant modifications issued by region within 18 months of receiving a complete permit application.
Percentage of Part 71 initial permits issued by region within 18 months of receiving a complete permit application.
Part 71 renewals: Percentage reduction of total Part 71 extended permits.
Percentage of PSD permits issued by region within one year of receiving a complete permit application.
Percentage of Part 70 initial permits reviewed by region.
Non-
Cmmit
Ind
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
State
Grant
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
National
Target
100%
100%
100%
78%
1 program
per region
75%
100%
100%
94%
10%
80%
75%
Final Guidance May 7, 2010
Final Appendix A - Page 3 of 7
-------
Appendix A
ACS
Code
OAQPS
P21
NEW
OAQPS
T001
OAQPS
T002
OAQPS
T05
OAQPS
T06
OAQPS
TR01
OAQPS
TR02
OAQPS
TR03
OAQPS
TR04
OAQPS
TR06
OAQPS
TR08
OTAQ
Ola
Measure Text
Percentage of Part 70 permit renewals reviewed by region.
Cumulative percentage reduction in tons of toxicity -weighted (for cancer risk) emissions of air toxics, compared to 1993 baseline. [HQ
reports this measure]
Cumulative percentage reduction in tons of toxicity -weighted (for noncancer risk) emissions of air toxics, compared to 1993 baseline.
[HQ reports this measure]
Number of communities (e.g. CARE communities/projects) the region is working with to assess and address sources of air toxics,
including the use of voluntary air toxic reduction programs in their communities.
Percentage of requests from states, local agencies, and tribes for delegation of section 112 standards processed within 180 days of receipt.
Cumulative number of tribes with approved eligibility determinations under the Tribal Authority Rule.
Cumulative number of tribes with delegation of federal programs to address air quality conditions on tribal lands.
Cumulative number of tribes with approved TIPs to address air quality conditions on tribal lands.
Number of tribes conducting air quality monitoring activities.
Number of tribes implementing voluntary or other non-regulatory programs.
Number of reservations that completed or updated an emission inventory during FY201 1 .
Number of projects implemented that promote diesel emissions reductions. [The baseline is reset to zero at the beginning of each fiscal
year. At the end of each quarter, report the cumulative number of projects since the beginning of the Fiscal Year in the Current Value
field. In the Explanation field report the numbers and categories of projects in accordance with the Diesel Work Group's instructions and
definitions for reporting. Also in the Explanation field, report whether the data has been entered into National Clean Diesel Database.]
Non-
Cmmit
Ind
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
State
Grant
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
National
Target
25%
36%
59%
No Target
100%
11
3
6
No Target
No Target
No Target
No Target
Final Guidance May 7, 2010
Final Appendix A - Page 4 of 7
-------
Appendix A
ACS
Code
OTAQ
Olb
OTAQ
Olcl
OTAQ
Olc2
OTAQ
Olc3
OTAQ
Olc4
OTAQ
Olc5
OTAQ
Olc6
OTAQ
Olc7
OTAQ
Olc8
OTAQ
Olc9
OTAQ
OlclO
Measure Text
Number of existing heavy duty diesel engines (including school bus engines) that have been retrofitted, replaced, or retired. [The baseline
is reset to zero at the beginning of each fiscal year. At the end of each quarter, report the cumulative number of engines since the
beginning of the Fiscal Year in the Current Value field. Use the Explanation field to report whether that data has been entered into the
National Clean Diesel Database.]
Annual tons of NOx emissions avoided. [Include NCDC and SmartWay projects. The baseline is reset to zero at the beginning of each
fiscal year. At the end of each quarter, report the cumulative reductions of NOx since the beginning of the fiscal year in the Current Value
field. Use the "Explanation" field to report whether the data has been entered into the National Clean Diesel Database.]
Annual tons of PM emissions avoided. [Include NCDC and SmartWay projects. The baseline is reset to zero at the beginning of each
fiscal year. At the end of each quarter, report the cumulative reductions of PM since the beginning of the fiscal year in the Current Value
field. Use the "Explanation" field to report whether the data has been entered into the National Clean Diesel Database.]
Annual tons of HC emissions avoided. [Include NCDC and SmartWay projects. The baseline is reset to zero at the beginning of each
fiscal year. At the end of each quarter, report the cumulative reductions of HC since the beginning of the fiscal year in the Current Value
field. Use the "Explanation" field to report whether the data has been entered into the National Clean Diesel Database.]
Annual tons of CO emissions avoided. [Include NCDC and SmartWay projects. The baseline is reset to zero at the beginning of each
fiscal year. At the end of each quarter, report the cumulative reductions of CO since the beginning of the fiscal year in the Current Value
field. Use the Explanation field to report whether the data has been entered into the National Clean Diesel Database.]
Annual tons of CO2 emissions avoided. [Include NCDC and SmartWay projects. The baseline is reset to zero at the beginning of each
fiscal year. At the end of each quarter, report the cumulative reductions of CO2 since the beginning of the fiscal year in the Current Value
field. Use the Explanation field to report whether the data has been entered into the National Clean Diesel Database.]
Lifetime tons of NOx emissions avoided. [Include NCDC and SmartWay projects]
Lifetime tons of PM emissions avoided. [Include NCDC and SmartWay projects]
Lifetime tons of HC emissions avoided. [Include NCDC and SmartWay projects]
Lifetime tons of CO emissions avoided. [Include NCDC and SmartWay projects]
Lifetime tons of CO2 emissions avoided. [Include NCDC and SmartWay projects]
Non-
Cmmit
Ind
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
State
Grant
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
National
Target
No Target
No Target
No Target
No Target
No Target
No Target
No Target
No Target
No Target
No Target
No Target
Final Guidance May 7, 2010
Final Appendix A - Page 5 of 7
-------
Appendix A
ACS
Code
OTAQ
02a
OTAQ
02b
OTAQ
03a
OTAQ
03b
OTAQ
04
OTAQ
06
OTAQ
08
SIRG1
SIRG2
SIRG3
ORIA
IAQ3
Measure Text
Percentage of timely adequacy /inadequacy determinations made by the region for identified mobile source budgets included in control
strategy SIPs or maintenance plans for transportation-related criteria pollutants (e.g., ozone, CO, PM2.5, PM10) submitted by states.
[Report % in the Current Value field. Use Explanation field to report the actual number of determinations made, for what SIPs, and which
pollutants.]
Percentage of approval/disapproval rulemaking actions taken on mobile budgets included in control strategy SIPs or maintenance plans for
transportation-related criteria pollutants (e.g., ozone, CO, PM2.5, PM10) at the time of final rulemaking on such SIPs. [Report % in the
Current Value field. Use the Explanation field to report the actual number of approval/disapproval rulemaking actions taken for what SIPs
and which pollutants.]
Percentage of transportation conformity determinations submitted by US DOT or an MPO that the region reviewed and commented on for
8-hour ozone, PM2.5, PM10, and CO nonattainment and maintenance areas. [Report % in the Current Value field. Use the Explanation
field to list the conformity determinations reviewed, where, and for which pollutants.]
Number of final rulemaking actions taken by the region on Transportation Conformity -related SIP revisions consistent with the annual SIP
processing goal. [Report number in the Current Value field and use the Explanation field to provide the actual total number of submitted
SIPs where the due date for final rulemaking falls in FY1 1 . Also explain if bidding fewer than the universe, and if reporting Status as "not
on target" or "measure not met."]
Number of outreach activities conducted by the region to support SmartWay programs. [Bid the number of events region believes it will
do in F Yl 1 . Report the number of events in the Current Value. In the Explanation field list the outreach events including names and dates
of events.]
Percentage of I/M reports submitted by states for existing I/M programs (including OBD) reviewed by the region. [Report % in the
Current Value field. In the Explanation field provide the actual number of I/M reports that were submitted and reviewed, and from which
states.]
Number of CMAQ-funded clean diesel projects implemented by state and local governments. [Report the actual number of projects in the
Current Value field. In the Explanation field indicate whether the data has been entered into the National Clean Diesel Database.]
Number of additional homes with operating mitigation systems.
Number of additional homes built with radon-resistant new construction.
Number of additional schools mitigated and/or built with radon-resistant new construction.
Number of schools newly using organized indoor air quality management practices consistent with EPA TFS. [This is a non-commitment
indicator with regional bidding and reporting. Initial bid values are set at zero. Bid aggregate number of schools newly using organized
indoor air quality management practices consistent with EPA TFS. Report numbers in Current Value field and use Explanation field to
describe highlights, innovations, students reached, and anecdotal information about health outcomes and/or student performance.]
Non-
Cmmit
Ind
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
State
Grant
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
National
Target
100%
100%
100%
Sum of Bids
100
100%
No Target
No Target
No Target
No Target
1,100
Final Guidance May 7, 2010
Final Appendix A - Page 6 of 7
-------
Appendix A
ACS
Code
ORIA
IAQ5
ORIA
IAQ6
ORIA
IAQ7
NEW
ORIA
RAD1
ORIA
RAD 2
OAP1
OAP7
NEW
OAP8
NEW
Measure Text
Aggregate number of people with asthma and/or their caregivers educated about environmental management of asthma and childhood
exposure to ETS. [This is a non-commitment indicator with regional bidding and reporting. Initial bid values are set at zero. Bid number
of people educated. Report numbers in Current Value field and use Explanation field to describe highlights, innovations, and anecdotal
information about health outcomes.]
Aggregate number of health care professionals trained about environmental management of asthma and childhood exposure to ETS. [This
is a non-commitment indicator with regional bidding and reporting. Initial bid values are set at zero. Bid number of people educated.
Report numbers in Current Value field and use Explanation field to describe highlights, innovations, and anecdotal information about
health outcomes.]
Total number of programs enrolled in www.AsthmaCommunitvNetwork.org. [Reporting reflects the total current regional programs in
Communities in Action for Asthma Friendly Environments) network found at ( www.AsthmaCommunitvNetwork.org ) at the EOY.
Report numbers in Current Value field and use Explanation field to describe highlights, innovations, and anecdotal information about
health and other outcomes.]
Number of radiation exercises the region participates in. [Bid projected number of exercises. Report numbers in Current Value field and
use Explanation field to describe the name, location and type of each exercise as well as the number of regional radiation program
participants.]
Number of individuals identified and trained to fill RERT liaison and radiation advisor positions. [Bid projected total number of personnel
identified and fully qualified for the RERT liaison and radiation advisor positions. Each Region should have 1 RERT liaison and 1
radiation advisor position. Report numbers in Current Value field.]
Percentage increase in total square footage benchmarked compared to the total square footage benchmarked in CY 2010. [This data is
provided by HQ and has an expected lag of two months after the end of the quarter. Therefore, reporting will usually lag one quarter.]
Number of people reached (impressions) during regional outreach/education activities in promoting ENERGY STAR. [These activities
would include presentations, publications, interviews, and webinars. When reporting results, in the Explanation field, break impressions
into categories of Residential, Commercial, Products, or Programmatic Overview.]
Number of ENERGY STAR technical support activities. [Technical support includes, but is not limited to, planning meetings, award
ceremonies, direct assistance to the public, expertise requests, and meetings to develop future relationships with stakeholders. When
reporting results, in the Explanation field, break these points of contact into categories of Residential, Commercial, Products, or All.]
Non-
Cmmit
Ind
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
State
Grant
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
National
Target
No Target
2,000
No Target
No Target
20
15%
5,000
240
End
Final Guidance May 7, 2010
Final Appendix A - Page 7 of 7
-------
Appendix B
Appendix B - EFFECTIVE USE and DISTRIBUTION of STAG FUNDS
Effective Grants Management and Results
Key administrative and programmatic provisions that help govern the effective oversight
and utilization of continuing program and project-specific grants awarded to state, local, tribal
and multi-jurisdictional entities are summarized in this section of the appendix. The list is not
exhaustive but included are: proper use of authorities for award of assistance, adherence to
specific grant program requirements, effective post-award oversight, identification of
performance measures and results, the funding of co-regulator organizations, and the promotion
of competition. Links are provided to Agency internet and intranet sites where additional
information, including the full text of current guidance, is available.
Using Proper Authorities for Award
In FY 2009, OAR issued updated guidance for use by Program and Regional Offices to
help clarify who is eligible for grant assistance given the purpose, appropriation and grant
authority associated with the funds available. OAR will update the guidance, as needed, to
reflect changes associated with its annual appropriation. The current guidance may be accessed
at: http://intranet.epa.gov/ogd/state/Guid_Office_of_OAR.pdf The program contact is Courtney
Hyde at 202-564-1227.
Administrative Guidance for OAR Grant Programs
In FY 2009 OAR issued a reference document consolidating the various statutory,
regulatory and policy provisions that govern administration of the CAA §105 continuing air
grant program for state, local and some Tribal agencies. The guidance is intended as a resource
for HQ and regional staff. The guidance can be accessed at:
http://intranet.epa.gov/ogd/state/Consolidated GuidAdmS 105 Air Grant Program.pdf. The
program contact, William Houck, can be reached at 202-564-1349. For the Tribal air program,
additional guidance and links to Tribal air program information may be found at:
http://www.epa.gov/oar/tribal/pdfs/menuofoptions.pdf The program contact, Barrel Harmon,
may be reached at: 202-564-7416. The program contact for Diesel Emissions Reduction
Assistance (DERA) grants is Jennifer Keller who can be contacted at 202-343-9121. Additional
information and links to guidance on the State Indoor Radon Grant (SIRG) program may be
found in the State and Local Air Quality Management section of this guidance. The program
contact is Phil Jalbert at 202-343-9431.
Ensuring Effective Oversight of Assistance Agreements
Updated EPA Order 5700.2A2 streamlines the post-award management of grants and
cooperative agreements. It became effective January 1, 2008. The Order requires EPA offices to
monitor a recipient's compliance with its programmatic terms and conditions, the correlation of
the work plan and application content with actual grant progress, the use of equipment, and
compliance with relevant statutory and regulatory requirements. Offices are required to submit
oversight plans and document their execution. The Order may be found at:
http://intranet.epa.gOv/ogd/policy/4.0-PostAward-Topics.htm.
Final Guidance May 11, 2010 Appendix B-1 of 6
-------
Appendix B
Improving Workplans and Measurement of Performance for Grants
The Agency commitment to improve grant oversight and results is also reflected in its
efforts to promote accountability and transparency in its categorical grant programs through
relevant measures of performance, clear workplans and consistent reporting.
In FY 2007, the Agency began an effort to highlight results in its categorical programs by
focusing on a select set of performance measures drawn from the overall set of commitments and
measures contained its annual commitment system (ACS). For FY 2011, while the
administrative approach for displaying this information has changed (a separate template is no
longer required), the obligation to report on the applicable measures and their results has not.
Reporting on measures where results can be articulated at the Regional level remains the
responsibility of the Regions and grant recipients. Appendix A of this guidance contains the
overall set of performance measures applicable for FY 2011 including those that pertain to the
categorical grant programs.
EPA and ECOS continue to discuss whether there is utility in identifying a set of
common measures that reflect the primary functional work areas under each of the 14 Agency
categorical grant programs. Key concerns are what information should be captured and how it
could be effectively used. For information on the joint effort with ECOS, contact Margo Padgett
in OCFO at 202-564-1211.
How activities and measures are displayed is the key to transparency in grant workplans.
States, locals and Tribes seeking single media air and radon categorical grants and States and
Tribes seeking Performance Partnership grants containing air or radon elements should continue
to submit grant work plans that enable EPA to identify clear linkages between the recipient's
efforts and the Agency's Strategic Plan. The Agency's long-term goal is for EPA and the States
to achieve greater consistency in workplan formats.
To further promote workplan consistency and transparency, the Office of Grants and
Debarment (OGD), in concert with the national program offices, has convened a State/EPA
workgroup of grant practitioners to develop a menu of workplan formats for EPA and state and
local agencies to use when negotiating workplans for the 14 identified categorical programs.
This includes §105 Continuing Air Program and the State Indoor Radon Grant programs. In
developing these formats, the workgroup would build upon the results of the FY 2009 State
Grant Workplan pilots.l The formats would be available for use beginning with the FY 2011
grants cycle.
In consultation with the practitioner's workgroup, and recognizing that the formats will
need to be phased in over time, OGD would develop performance metrics to ensure that 100% of
workplans under the 14 categorical grant programs use one of the approved formats by no later
than the FY 2013 grants cycle. If a particular agency were to encounter difficulties under its
laws in adopting one of the established formats, OGD would work with the affected Region and
NPM to resolve the issue. OGD also proposes, in concert with ECOS, to evaluate the workplan
initiative and determine whether it would sufficiently enhance transparency and accountability
such that developing the common set of measures noted earlier would be unnecessary. Please
contact Howard Corcoran, OARM/OGD, at 202-564-1903 with any questions or comments.
1 See "Guidance for FY '09 State Workplan Pilots;" S. Hazen to DAAs and DRAs; May 16, 2008.
Final Guidance May 11, 2010 Appendix B-2 of 6
-------
Appendix B
In addition to clear measures and workplans, regular and consistent performance
reporting should enable the meaningful comparison of a categorical program recipient's past and
planned activities and performance. OAR and the Regional Offices are also working with
recipients and the rest of the Agency in a continuing process to assess, reduce, refine or affirm
existing reporting requirements. OAR is always receptive to comment from state, local and
tribal agencies on ways to reduce reporting burdens as well as ways to improve performance
reporting and performance measures. This includes discussion of improved short-term
environmental indicators and performance measures and their incorporation in annual and multi-
year assistance agreements.
Achieving Programmatic and Environmental Results
Sound measures of performance should yield insightful and useful results data. EPA
Order 5700.7 applies to all Agency grants not just categorical grants to States and covers all
phases of the grants process from development of a solicitation to evaluation of results. The
Order requires EPA project officers to assure that each grant: (a) can be linked to the Agency's
strategic architecture, (b) articulates measurable outputs and outcomes, and (c) reports the
programmatic and, where possible, environmental results achieved. For more information see:
http://intranet.epa.gOv/ogd/policy/order/5700.7.pdf and
http://www.epa.gov/ocfo/npmguidance/oar/2007/oar_2007_environ_results.pdf.
Approval Process for STAG Awards to Co-Regulator Organizations
A co-regulator organization is defined by EPA as a national or regional (i.e., multi-
jurisdictional) organization that represents the interests of co-regulators/co-implementors (state,
tribal or local governments) in the execution of national or regional environmental programs.2
EPA issued a policy on December 1, 2006 that clarified that the head of the affected State agency
or department (e.g., the State environmental commissioner or head of the State public health or
agricultural agency) be involved in the funding process and that EPA request and obtain the prior
consent of this official before taking funds off the top of a state grant allotment for direct award
to a state/local co-regulator organization. The Agency's policy on STAG funds in awards to co-
regulator/co-implementor organizations may be found at:
http://intranet.epa.gov/ogd/competition/piexemptions/approval_process for STAG awards.htm.
It is also important to note that the award of funds to such an organization is still subject
to a determination as to whether it can be exempted from competition. Effective October 1,
2007, the Agency's Competition Policy found that co-regulator status alone for a multi-
juridictional, co-implementor organization did not warrant an exception from competition. Other
exceptions, including the 'public interest' exception, remain available for consideration. The
Competition Policy may be found at: http://www.epa.gov/ogd/competition/5700 5Al.pdf.
The definition of co-regulator or co-implementor may be found in the Agency's Order (5700.5A1) - Revised Competition
Policy, http://intranet.epa. gov/ogd/policv/order/5700_5 .pdf. In various regions of the country state and local agencies have
formed multi-jurisdictional organizations (MJO) to help coordinate their geographically-specific air quality interests. These
agencies have directed their Regional Offices to target portion of their grant allotment to their MJO. For OAR, the only co-
regulator grant awarded at the national level with STAG resources has been to the National Association of Clean Air Agencies
(formerly STAPPA-ALAPCO). See the State and Local Air Quality Management section for more details.
Final Guidance May 11, 2010 Appendix B-3 of 6
-------
Appendix B
Promotion of Competition
Agency policy is to promote competition in the award of grants and cooperative
agreements where practical. EPA Order 5700.5Al presents the Agency's competition policy.
The Order exempts grants for continuing environmental programs, such as those funded under
§105 as well as §103 grants for fine particulate monitoring, §103 national air toxics monitoring
trends network grants, federally-recognized tribes and inter-tribal consortia under OAR's tribal
grant program; and TSCA §306 grants for state indoor radon programs. Radon grants to tribes
and intertribal consortia under TSCA §10 grants must be competed. EPA is not precluded from
awarding grants through competition for a portion of the exempted programs if the Agency
determines it is in the best interest of the public to do so. Contact Courtney Hyde at 202-564-
1227 for more information on competition of grants.
Efficient Exchange of Environmental Information
As earlier noted in the Cross-Cutting Priorities section of the Executive Summary portion
of the main document - states, tribes and territories exchanging both regulatory and non-
regulatory environmental data with one another, or with EPA, should make the Exchange
Network and EPA's connection to it, the Central Data Exchange (CDX), where available, the
standard way to exchange data. Other legacy methods should be phased out. More information
can be obtained at: http://www.exchangenetwork.net/index.htm.
Preliminary Allocation for State/Local Continuing Air Program Grants
A preliminary allocation of state and local continuing air program grants has been
included. It should assist Regions in their initial negotiations of FY 2011 grant workplans with
their state and local air agencies. It is important to note, however, that a final allocation is still
subject to (a) appropriation of funds and direction by Congress, and (b) further consultation with
both EPA Program and Regional Offices, as well as with the affected state, local, and tribal
agencies. Responsibilities and funds for multi-jurisdictional organizations must also still be
addressed.
EPA has not yet completed its preliminary allocations of: (a) the $15 million in STAG
funds requested for monitoring equipment purchases (and related site preparation) in support of
the revised NAAQS; and (b) the $25 million STAG request for program capacity building for
GHG permitting. These allocations will also be the subject of additional consultation with our
partners and are anticipated to be available within the next several months.
Final allocations for State Indoor Radon Grants and Tribal Air grants are also not
included.. The distribution of funds for these programs is subject to further consultation with co-
implementors and other stakeholders and is also subject to Congressional appropriation.
Final Guidance May 11, 2010 Appendix B-4 of 6
-------
Appendix B
DRAFT Table B-l
PRELIMINARY Allocation of FY 2011
State/Local Continuing Air Program Grants (in $s)*
(GHG and Expanded NAAQS Monitoring $s are not included)
Direct Award to Regions (Includes Associated Program Support for Specific Recipients)
Region
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Subtotal
NAAQS/SIPs
6,558,063
7,427,770
8,809,979
11,658,233
13,002,615
7,748,782
3,049,607
4,383,754
15,005,798
4,119,588
81,774,189
Monitoring
5,695,160
6,450,431
7,650,771
10,124,255
11,291,745
6,729,205
2,648,343
3,815,628
13,031,351
3,577,537
71,014,427
Air Toxics
2,588,709
2,932,014
3,477,623
4,601,934
5,132,611
3,058,730
1,203,792
1,734,377
5,923,341
1,626,153
32,279,285
Compl. /Oversight
2,416,129
2,736,547
3,245,782
4,295,138
4,790,437
2,854,814
1,123,540
1,618,751
5,528,452
1,517,743
30,127,333
Total
17,258,061
19,546,762
23,184,156
30,679,559
34,217,408
20,391,531
8,025,282
11,562,510
39,488,943
10,841,020
215,195,233
Associated Program Support at the National Level
CAA Training
IMPROVE
1,228,000
1,995,000
1,228,000
Targeted Monitoring
PM2.5 Air Monitoring (103/105)**
NATTS
Local Air Toxics Monitoring
41,875,000
4,995,000
41,875,000
4,995,000
3,153,000
Interstate Transport Commissions
N.E. O3 Transport Commission
638,767
Total
269,080,000
* Includes associated program support (see Table B-2), Great Lakes in RO5, US-Mexico Border in ROs 6&9, PAMS & PAMS assessment; Pb
monitoring & Pb PEP support. ** Includes PM2.5 PEP support.
Final Guidance May 11, 2010
Appendix B-5 of 6
-------
Appendix B
DRAFT Table B-2
Associated Program Support for Specific Recipients by Region (in $s)
(Funds to be Reserved from Direct Award Amounts in Table B-l)
(PRELIMINARY Amounts)
Activity
NOx Trading
NACAA
NPAP
Nat'l Procure
Contract
Lead
Monitoring PEP
PAMS
Asssmnts
PAMS Equipmt
Upgrd
1
101,080
85,267
3,400
42133
2
359,765
192,365
6,110
197,079
3
347,795
178,149
72,200
36,310
4
665,665
332,712
63,700
145,674
5
609,856
282,226
129,800
197,443
6
103,740
83,700
47,100
25,582
7
125,685
72,477
19,520
43,671
8
35.654
30,800
145,997
9
291,773
57,500
107,352
10
67,434
23,950
7,383
Total
2,313,586
1,621,777
454,080
948,624
TBD
TBD
TBD
Final Guidance May 11, 2010
Appendix B-6 of 6
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
Appendix C.
AMBIENT AIR MONITORING
EPA and its partners at state,
local, and tribal agencies, manage
and operate ambient air monitoring
networks across the country with
three primary objectives: to ensure
the public has access to clean air by
comparing data and implementation
of the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) and other
health indicators for toxics, to
provide the public with reports and
forecasts of the Air Quality Index,
and to provide information to health
and atmospheric scientists to better
inform future reviews of the
NAAQS.
EPA works with state, local, and
tribal air monitoring agencies to
continuously improve the ambient
air monitoring networks for current
and future needs. This work
includes milestones that have
resulted from planning the ambient
air monitoring network through a
stakeholder driven process known as
the Ambient Air Monitoring
Strategy1 (monitoring strategy) as
well as through NAAQS reviews
that include both public and
scientific input.
While recent NAAQS reviews are
resulting in changes to the
monitoring networks, the overall
goals and themes of the monitoring
strategy remain the same. The major
purpose of the monitoring strategy is
to optimize the networks to be more
responsive to current and future
needs (e.g., assess air quality trends,
better characterize the multi-pollutant nature of air pollution, provide for more timely
NAAQS Related Monitoring Highlights
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) NAAQS strengthened with addition
of one-hour standard to protect against short-term exposures;
monitors will be necessary in locations to measure peak
concentrations that occur over shorter periods of time; these
locations will typically be near major roads in urban areas.
Revised network must be in place by January 1, 2013. Area-
wide component of network will be retained.
Lead (Pb) NAAQS monitoring proposal to require monitoring
near lead sources with emissions of 0.5 to 1.0 tons per year.
Also, proposing non-source lead monitors at NCore stations.
If finalized, monitors would need to be in place by one-year
after final rule is effective (projected deadline approximately
summer 2011).
Ozone (O 3) NAAQS reconsideration. EPA is reconsidering
the level of the ozone NAAQS that was finalized in Spring of
2008 as the NAAQS is not as protective as recommended by
EPA's panel of science advisors, the Clean Air Scientific
Advisory Committee.
Ozone (O 3) Monitoring Requirements - Separate from the
NAAQS reconsideration, EPA has proposed changes to the
ozone monitoring requirements that would add monitors in
smaller urban areas not already required to monitor, non-
urban areas to characterize ozone in sensitive ecosystems and
provide coverage in less populated areas, and lengthening the
ozone monitoring season. If finalized, new monitors would
need to be operating by the first day of the ozone season in
2012; monitoring season changes would take effect on the
first day of ozone monitoring in 2011.
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) NAAQS is proposed for strengthening
by replacing the existing primary SO2 NAAQS with a one-
hour standard. Monitoring requirements for SO2 are also
proposed to be revised. Monitoring would be required in
Core Based Statistical Areas (CBSA's) based on population
size and SO2 emissions. Additional monitoring would also
be required based on the States contribution to national SO2
emissions, which could be placed either within or outside a
CBSA's. All new SO2 monitoring would be required to be
operational by January 1, 2013.
Carbon Monoxide (CO) NAAQS: Changes must be proposed
by October 28, 2010 and finalized by May 13, 2011. The
CASAC CO Review Panel has noted concerns with the
adequacy of the current network and the sensitivity of
currently deployed ambient methods.
Particulate Matter (PM2 5 and PM10) NAAQS: Changes must
be proposed by late November 2010 and finalized by late July
2011. EPA is consulting with CASAC on the appropriate
methods and network design that might be needed to support
a secondary PM NAAQS designed to protect urban visibility.
Available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/monstratdoc.html
Final Guidance May?, 2010
AppendixC-1 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
information through continuous
monitoring, better support development of
improved air quality simulation models,
etc.). EPA finalized revisions to the
ambient air monitoring regulations in
20062 to align the ambient air monitoring
requirements with the themes and
objectives of the monitoring strategy. The
new regulations also added some new
monitoring requirements with
implementation dates ranging from
January 1, 2007 to January 1, 2011.
Additional Key Monitoring Highlights
Continued improvement of the ambient air monitoring
program:
>
>
NCore stations to be fully operational by January 1 ,
2011
The first 5-year assessment of each States Air
Quality Monitoring Network is due to EPA by July
1,2010.
Daily speciation through a combination of filter-
based and continuous methods in a small number of
cities to support multiple objectives including
accelerating the pace of health studies
Emphasis on air toxics "hot-spots" such as schools
as part of next community-scale monitoring projects
As part of its commitment to review
each NAAQS within a five-year period,
EPA has recently reviewed and revised
NAAQS for particulate matter (PM), ozone (63), lead (Pb), and nitrogen dioxide (NC^). EPA
also has proposed changes to the sulfur dioxide (802) primary NAAQS, and remains on
schedule to review all primary and secondary NAAQS within a five-year period. In the case of
the recent ozone NAAQS, which is being reconsidered, the review period is shorter than five
years. All of the final NAAQS rules have resulted in either necessary revision to the monitoring
requirements to better support the revised NAAQS. In the case of ozone monitoring,
improvements in coverage of unmonitored areas and the addition of several months of
monitoring to the ozone season should result.
EPA is working closely with its partners through forums such as the Ambient Air Monitoring
Committee of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies (NACAA) and the Ambient Air
Monitoring Steering Committee (co-chaired by the NACAA State and local Monitoring Co-
chairs and the Director of EPA's Air Quality Assessment Division within the Office of Air and
Radiation's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards) to ensure monitoring agencies and
EPA are working together to improve the ambient air monitoring networks for current and future
needs. EPA has also scheduled numerous consultative meetings with the Ambient Air Methods
and Monitoring Subcommittee (AAMMS) of the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee
(CAS AC) to obtain independent reviews of proposed monitoring changes.
Given the multitude of NAAQS reviews in progress, the following Table C-l has been
provided to: help assist agencies in understanding the status of each NAAQS review; identify
important dates that affect monitoring implementation; and find where more detailed information
can be reviewed.
2 40 CFR Part 53 and Part 58, October 17, 2006.
Final Guidance May 7, 2010
AppendixC-2 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
Table C-l - Summary of NAAQS Implementation Timeline for Ambient Monitoring
NAAQS
NO2 -
Primary
NAAQS and
Monitoring
Lead-
Monitoring
Ozone -
PfTmflTV £111 H
JT i iiiidi y diiu.
oGconQciry
NAAQS
Ozone
Monitoring
S02-
Primary
NAAQS and
Monitoring
SO, andNO2
- Secondary
NAAQS and
Monitoring
CO - Primary
and
Secondary
NAAQS and
Monitoring
PM - Primary
and
Secondary
NAAQS and
Monitoring
Date of Proposed or
Final Rule, if
available
Final rule signed
January 25, 2010
Proposed Rule -
Signed December 23,
2009
Proposed Rule -
Signed January 6,
2010
Proposed Monitoring
Rule Published July
16, 2009
Proposed Rule -
Published December
8 , 2009
Final Rule - expected
by June 2 2010
Proposal expected by
July 12,2011
Proposed rule
expected by October
28,2010. Final rule
expected by May 13,
2011
Proposal expected no
later than November
2011. Final rule
expected late July
2011.
Summary of Changes to
Monitoring
• Addition of near-
roadway monitoring
• Area- wide monitoring
remains and becomes
required
• Require monitoring
near lead sources with
emissions of 0.5 to 1.0
tons per year.
• Addition of non-source
lead monitors at NCore
stations.
Date Monitoring must be
Operating by:
January 1,2013
Monitors would need to be
in place by one-year after
final rule is effective.
Estimate of summer 20 1 1
for revised monitoring to
begin.
No specific changes for monitoring. Slightly more required
monitors would be triggered by existing rules if more protective
NAAQS is finalized
Lengthening the ozone
monitoring season where
appropriate; addition of
monitors in:
• smaller urban areas
not already required
to monitor; and
• non-urban areas to
characterize ozone in
sensitive ecosystems
and provide coverage
in less populated
areas.
Monitoring would be required
in Core Based Statistical Areas
(CBSA's) based on population
size and SO2 emissions.
Additional monitoring would
also be required based on the
States contribution to national
SO2 emissions, which could be
placed either within or outside
a CBSA's.
Ozone monitoring season
changes would take effect on
the first day of the revised
ozone monitoring season in
2011.
Revisions to the ozone
network would take place on
the first day of the ozone
monitoring season in 2012
January 1,2013
NAAQS review on-going
NAAQS review
on-going
NAAQS review on-going. Review includes assessment of a
potential separate secondary PM NAAQS for urban visibility.
More information on
final/proposed rule
available at:
http: //www.epa. gov/air/nit
rogenoxides/actions.html#
ju!09
http: //www.epa. go v/air/lea
d/actions.html#dec09
http: //www.epa. gov/air/oz
onepollution/actions.html
http: //www.epa. gov/air/sul
furdioxide/actions.htmWn
ov09
http: //www.epa. gov/ttn/na
aqs/standards/no2 so2 sec/i
ndex html
http: //www.epa. gov/ttn/na
aqs/standards/co/s_co_ind
ex.html
http: //www.epa. gov/air/pa
rticlepollution/
Final Guidance May?, 2010
AppendixC-3 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
This document provides guidance on the use of section 103 and 105 STAG resources for air
toxics and criteria pollutant monitoring networks, as well as important associated networks such
as the Chemical Speciation Network (CSN), IMPROVE, and PAMS. The document provides
information on directions and priorities for ambient monitoring that attempt to take into account
the emerging needs identified in various NAAQS reviews while adhering to the themes
identified in the Ambient Air Monitoring Strategy for State, Local, and Tribal Air Agencies.
These include an emphasis on multi-pollutant monitoring and favoring continuous over
integrated PM samplers. This guidance is also consistent with the revisions to the ambient air
monitoring regulations for applicable monitoring of NCore, lead, and NC>2 as well as what is
proposed for SC>2. Guidance associated with NAAQS pollutants that have not had a recent
review (i.e., carbon monoxide, and nitrogen dioxide/sulfur dioxide secondary NAAQS
monitoring needs) have not been provided since this work is still in review.
Highlights of Changes in Monitoring Funding for FY 2011
For FY 2011, EPA has requested an additional $15 million in STAG resources to help fund
additional monitoring required as a result of revising the NAAQS for lead, NC>2, and ozone.
EPA intends to use the $15 million for purchasing monitoring equipment using the section 103
authority of the CAA. Beginning in FY 2011, and through FY 2014, EPA proposes to transition
the funding authority for PM2.5 monitoring from section 103 to 105. We continue to seek input
from states and locals on the most useful way to carry this out over the 4-year transition period.
Federal funding for on-going operations of all other pollutants is proposed to be provided
utilizing section 105 authority. EPA will work with the states on the deployment of new
monitors, including minimizing expenses to EPA and the states, as a result of the various
changes to the NAAQS. Some additional details of EPA's plans for funding monitoring in FY
2011 follow:
EPA proposes to target $2.7M in §105 funds to Regions for award to states for the on-going
operation and maintenance of the revised lead network, based on the 2008 Lead NAAQS and
monitoring rulemaking and the anticipated impact of the lead monitoring revisions that were
proposed in December 2009. The $2.7M represents the 60% Federal share of the expected
$4.5M in costs it will take to operate the lead network in FY 2011. Funds for lead monitoring
and program support have been included in the amount of funds targeted for the Regions for
direct award to section 105 recipients and will need to be separately identified.
In developing the PM2.5 monitoring allocation for FY 2011, OAR will employ the same region-
by-region funding approach used in prior years - e.g., determination of per month costs of
operating the existing network. This cost per month is based on examining prior year grants in
detail and determining a cost per month for each grantee. For FY 2010, all PM2.s monitoring
grants are expected to end on March 31, 2011. Therefore, funding for FY 2011 will be for a 12
month period beginning April 1, 2011.
For the PM2.5 network, EPA considers the overall size of the existing Federal Reference Method
(FRM)/Federal Equivalent Method (FEM) network adequate for implementing the revised
NAAQS. Regional offices and the states should consider: (a) whether the current network of
FRM/FEM and supplemental PM2.s speciation sites is optimal for supporting implementation of
Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C -4 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
the revised PM2.5 NAAQS, and (b) how samplers among stations and even funds among states
would need to be shifted to provide equitable access to the speciation data needed to understand
the causes of 24-hour NAAQS nonattainment for each prospective nonattainment area. Also,
changes in population exposure and emissions patterns may mean that a small number of sites
each year may need to be re-located. Any possible changes to the PM^ network are to be
identified in the respective agencies annual monitoring network plan due to the applicable EPA
Region by July 1 of each year according to §58.10 - Annual Monitoring Network Plan and
Periodic Network Assessment.
• For FY 2011 there will be changes in the unit cost of PM2.5 filters and speciation laboratory
services provided as associated program support due to pre-negotiated contract increases in unit
prices. As a placeholder until monitoring agencies inform EPA of their planned use of filters and
laboratory services in 2010, EPA proposes to initially reserve funds as associated program
support based on an assumption that the number of filters and the number of monitoring sites
requiring laboratory services will be the same in 2011 as in 2010.
• EPA is beginning the second year of a five-year contract for chemical analysis and reporting of
the Speciation Trends Network (STN) and supplemental stations that make up a large portion of
the Chemical Speciation Network (CSN). The other major component of the CSN is the
IMPROVE protocol stations run by state, local, and tribal agencies. Laboratory and reporting
services for IMPROVE protocol stations are provided as part of an interagency agreement with
the National Park Service. The Speciation Trends Network (STN) operates every third day and
the supplemental stations nominally operate every sixth day. Under the new contract, all STN
and supplemental stations are now supported with Teflon and nylon filter modules for the Met
One SASS or Met One SuperSASS samplers.
• Funding for the portion of the IMPROVE program that addresses progress in improving
visibility in Class I areas will remain the same as in previous years. This includes funding for
the 110 IMPROVE stations needed to meet the regional haze rule requirements of states
monitoring Class I areas for long-term trends through and beyond the 10-year SIP period (2008
to 2018). This is also useful in the periodic assessments of progress that are required in
achieving the national visibility goal.
• The level of funds for the nationally administered, independent Performance Evaluation Program
(PEP) provided as associated program support for PM2.5 monitoring is expected to be
approximately $1.5 million. Monitoring agencies with an adequate level of independence
between quality assurance and monitoring groups may conduct the PEP themselves. In these
cases monitoring agencies that conduct the PEP will receive the refundable portion of the EPA
program costs that would otherwise have been used to pay for EPA regional lab contract staff.
• EPA has developed a lead (Pb) Performance Evaluation Program (Pb-PEP). The PEP is required
to support the requirements of the 2008 Lead NAAQS and monitoring final rule. This program
will operate similar to the PM2.5 PEP with a call letter for participation to be sent at the same
time as the call for participation in other federally implemented performance evaluation
programs. Where federally implemented, EPA Regional ESAT contract staff are expected to
leverage audits for multiple programs when visiting an area. The cost of participation in this
program is still being developed and will depend on the number of participating agencies, the
Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C -5 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
number of stations to audit each year, and the number of audits that can be leveraged with other
activities during an area visit.
• The level of funds for the nationally administered, independent National Performance Audit
Program (NPAP) is expected to be approximately $454,000. This level assumes no significant
increase in monitoring sites for FY 2011. Table C-l shows that potential increases in the number
of monitoring sites will occur in 2012 and later. Similar to the PEP, in the NPAP, monitoring
agencies with an adequate level of independence between quality assurance and monitoring
groups may conduct the NPAP themselves and receive the §105 funds that otherwise would have
supported their participation in the national program. In FY 2011 it is expected that most NCore
sites will be running and a percentage will require NPAP audits. Current NPAP analyzers will
need to be replaced to accomplish audits at the lower levels needed for the NCore program and
required by the 2006 revisions to Appendix A of the monitoring requirements, 40 CFR Part 58.
In 2011, $135,000 is proposed to be allocated to upgrade half of the NPAP mobile laboratories
with high sensitivity audit equipment.
• In FY 2011, EPA anticipates that there may be shifts in PM2.5 monitoring funds used to support
laboratory analysis for chemical speciation at NCore stations.
• For FY 2011, EPA proposes to utilize $150,000 prorated from each PAMS recipient, to perform
regional and national scale assessments of the network and of the data. This is planned to be
follow-up to the existing assessments to enhance the usefulness and utility of the PAMS data.
Assessments will be performed to address a number of questions on the wealth of data collected
by agencies operating PAMS. As in the past, EPA will solicit input among PAMS data users,
including State and local agencies, on priorities for national and regional assessments. In the
preliminary allocation these funds are contained within the respective region by region
allotments.
• For F Y 2011, EPA proposes to reserve of 5% of the PAMS funds ($700K) for the expressed
purpose of purchasing new capital equipment (e.g., gas chromatographs and upper air
meteorology equipment) for participating agencies. All funds will be utilized as either direct
award to a PAMS program or equipment will be purchased and provided. PAMS equipment
upgrades are being made since several PAMS agencies have reported they are unable to purchase
new equipment and much of their existing inventory of PAMS monitoring equipment is
outdated. EPA will work closely with affected PAMS agencies to ensure the most effective
approach is utilized to purchase equipment. In the preliminary allocation these funds are
contained within the respective region by region allotments.
• In FY 2011, EPA anticipates funding air toxics monitoring at the existing 27 National Air Toxics
Trends Stations (NATTS).
• For the 2011 community-scale air toxics funds, EPA plans to continue support for monitoring
projects involving "hot-spots," such as locations where communities that may be impacted from
a local source or sources with elevated levels of air toxics emissions. EPA will emphasize
monitoring in disproportionately affected communities, including the pilot areas included under
the joint OAR/OECA air toxics initiative.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C -6 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
Fine Particulate (PMi.s) Monitoring Network
The PM2 5 monitoring network includes three well-established components: the network of
filter-based FRM/FEMs used for comparison to the NAAQS; continuous mass monitors used in
public reporting of the Air Quality Index; and speciation program samplers and monitors. The
latter include the Speciation Trends Network, supplemental speciation sites, and the IMPROVE
program that is used to characterize the chemical composition that makes up fine particulate
matter. Smaller dynamic components of the PM2.5 monitoring program include a small network
of continuous speciation monitors and the measurement of precursors to PM2 5 at NCore multi-
pollutant stations. Areas of interest to enhance PM monitoring include expanding the network
of PM2.s continuous monitors with recently approved FEMs and planning for daily speciation
sampling in a small number of the most populated cities in the country where this information
can support data needs in a state and for use in helping expedite health studies.
The PM2.5 NAAQS was last updated in October of 2006. At that time EPA revised the PM2.5
NAAQS by lowering the 24-hour (or daily) standard from 65|ig/m3 to 35|ig/m3. EPA also
retained the existing annual fine particle standard at 15 |ig/m3. EPA is actively reviewing the
PM NAAQS and expects to issue a notice of proposed rulemaking by November 2010, with a
final rulemaking by July 2011.
In planning a PM2 5 monitoring network for 2011, agencies are expected to use information
from their five-year assessment due to each Regional Office by July 1, 2010 for any immediate
changes that need to be addressed. Such changes should be proposed in this year's annual
monitoring network plan due the same date. For example, agencies should continue to optimize
their networks with information supported from their assessment that is necessary to meet the
network design criteria described in Appendix D to Part 58. However, given that a PM NAAQS
proposal is expected in November 2010, EPA is not expecting substantial changes in 2011. EPA
does envision that state/local agencies will continue to maintain a large robust network of PM2.5
monitors to support several monitoring objectives including protection of public health through
the NAAQS.
Overall Direction
FY 2011 continues the multi-year transition of the ambient air monitoring carried out by state
and local air monitoring agencies along the path outlined by the Monitoring Strategy. For PM2.5
this means continued operation of high value FRM and speciation sites; PM2.5 continuous
monitoring and associated data management systems for timely reporting of high quality data;
and precursor gas analyzers, data analyses and quality assurance activities that will support better
understanding of particle formation. With several recently approved PM2.5 continuous FEMs,
monitoring agencies may replace existing PM2 5 SLAMS sites operating filter-based FRMs with
continuous FEMs.
The networks will continue operation of high value sites, with investments and divestments.
To provide a clearer understanding of the expected outcomes of the ambient air monitoring
objectives, the following goals for the fine particulate monitoring network have been developed:
Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C -7 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
• Appropriate spatial characterization of PM2.5 NAAQS;
• Public Reporting of PM2.5 in the AQI;
• Characterization of PM2.5 chemical speciation data for long term trends, development and
accountability of emission control programs, tracking of regional haze, and for use in health
studies;
• Operation of NCore trace-level CO, SO2, NO2/NOy and PM (PM2.5 and PMio-2.5) monitoring
to support characterization of PM precursors;
• Assessment of PM2.5 data quality;
• Procurement and testing of PM2.5 filters.
Disinvestments and other Changes
For FY 2011, EPA is not expecting significant changes to the PM2 5 monitoring networks.
EPA is planning to issue a notice of proposed rulemaking on the PM NAAQS by November
2010, with a final rule by July 2011. Also, in 2010, monitoring agencies will be working on their
five-year assessments which, when combined with final decisions from the PM NAAQS review,
will help to shape any future changes to the PM2 5 monitoring networks. Any such changes, if
necessary, would likely begin to occur no sooner than in FY 2012 or beyond. In cases where the
five-year assessment shows problems with the currently deployed networks (e.g., the current
network design is not being appropriately implemented) EPA encourages addressing that issue in
this years annual monitoring network plan.
Chemical speciation data from the Speciation Trends Network, IMPROVE, and the remaining
supplemental speciation sites will continue to be utilized to track progress over time as the
national and local control programs are implemented. There are some areas that are expected to
be in residual nonattainment for PM2 5 even after the national control strategies are implemented
or that may be designated nonattainment with the revised 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. In these cases
the regional office and the state, and where appropriate, local agencies should work out an
appropriate network design for the chemical speciation component of their PM2 5 monitoring
network as part of their annual network review within the available allocation,. States and local
agencies may consider divesting of low-value supplemental speciation stations in areas that are
not expected to be in violation of the PM2.5 NAAQS.
As in 2010, monitoring organizations will again be asked to determine whether they plan on
implementing the PM2 5 Performance Evaluation Program (PEP) or allow for continued Federal
implementation of this program. Monitoring organizations must meet the minimum
requirements of adequate and independent in order to implement the PEP. OAQPS has provided
guidance to regional offices on how to assess adequacy and independence of proposed audit
programs.3 Information on this decision process will be provided in a memorandum from the
EPA regional office to the monitoring organizations each year in order to make decisions that
will affect the next calendar year audit activities. OAQPS anticipates that a FY 2011 guidance
memorandum covering details on participation in the PM2 5 PEP will be issued to the EPA
regional offices in June 2010.
3 January 8, 2007 memorandum from Phil Lorang (Ambient Air Monitoring Group Leader) to Regional Office
ambient monitoring managers.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C -8 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
Investments
EPA's Office of Research and Development has now approved several PM2.5 continuous
monitors as FEMs.4 These methods are now available and their data can be compared to the
NAAQS as well as for public reporting of the Air Quality Index (AQI). Monitoring agencies
that are comfortable with an approved FEM could benefit by discontinuing operation of some or
all (with the exception of required FRMs for QA purposes) of their FRMs, which tend to be
costly to operate due to pre- and post- sampling laboratory analysis. These savings could be
used to pay for some of the cost of the new monitors; however, capital acquisition funds would
need to be provided up-front for the new monitors. Therefore, EPA regions will work closely
with state and local agencies within the existing funding allocations on whether new monitors
should be purchased. Technical direction on implementing and reporting data from continuous
PM2.5 FEM and FRM monitors is available on EPA's AMTIC web site.5
Gas monitoring with high sensitivity measurements of CO, SO2, and NO/NOy will continue
as part of the PM2 5 monitoring network to support characterization of PM precursors in FY
2011. Planning over the last few years has resulted in funding being available for all approved
NCore multi-pollutant sites for these pollutants.
EPA will also be working with state and local agencies to pilot a small number of PM2 5
continuous mass monitors and ammonia samplers where funds are available. For daily
speciation, EPA expects to work with a small number of monitoring agencies to pilot daily
characterization of fine particle chemical speciation using a combination of continuous and filter-
based technologies. One solution might include post-sampling laboratory analysis of elements
on Teflon filters with semi-continuous operation of sulfate and carbon monitors.
Monitoring agencies may also find it useful to use a portion of their direct awards to
implement additional meteorology equipment that supports forecasting of the AQI. Of specific
interest may be recently commercialized, high quality, and lower priced instruments that
characterize the vertical thermal structure of the boundary layer.
For FY 2011, PM2.5 monitoring grant funds allocated to states can be directed towards
improvements in data management systems to support timely reporting of high quality data from
PM continuous mass monitors, PM continuous speciation monitors, and precursor gas monitors.
Resources dedicated to this area will support processing, validating, and reporting of data that
supports the PM monitoring program.
In late 2011, EPA expects to host a comprehensive National Ambient Air Monitoring
Conference. This conference was last held in November of 2009. EPA and state and local
agencies will both benefit by strong participation in this conference to manage and enhance the
ambient air monitoring program. EPA regions are encouraged to make participation in the
conference a condition of each agency's PM2.s monitoring grant.
4 http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/criteria. html
5 http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/datamang.html
Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C -9 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
Distribution of Funds
The FY 2011 national program guidance does not yet include a final allocation of PM2.5
monitoring funds among regional offices for use in direct awards based on a schedule for
phasing out the use of section 103 authority. Pursuant to the EPA-NACAA retreat and the
follow-up workgroups created, EPA will be consulting further with stakeholders on this topic. In
addition we are still seeking comment on how to allocate PM2.5 monitoring funding in light of
remaining implementation issues associated with NCore and in consideration of rising contract
costs for speciation laboratory support, filter procurement, and contract support for the QA-PEP
program.
A final allocation will include tables that will provide more detailed information on the
region-by-region allocation including cost estimates for associated program support. Cost
estimates will be based on an assumption that monitoring organizations will not reduce their
networks (and the services/ materials needed to support them) in 2011 compared to previous
years. The estimates should help inform how the program costs may change this coming year
and are subject to change based on monitoring organizations' actual plans for the numbers of
sites that will need these services in FY 2011.6 These numbers may decline if states choose not
to maintain their existing PM2.5 monitoring networks.
For more information on PM2.5 monitoring, contact Tim Hanley at 919-541-4417 or via email
at hanley.tim@epa.gov. For additional information on the follow-up workgroups relating to
resource issues stemming from the OAR-NACAA retreat, contact Jerry Kurtzweg at 202-564-
1234.
Monitoring Networks for Other NAAQS Pollutants
Support of Established NAAQS Networks
With a number of NAAQS decisions already final or to be final by FY 2011, EPA will need
to work closely with affected air monitoring programs on deploying new or revised monitoring
networks, where necessary. This section summarizes both the new monitoring that will need to
be implemented during FY 2011 as well as new operations and maintenance for monitoring that
needs to be operational during FY 2011 for NAAQS. These areas are traditionally funded using
section 105 authority and include: ozone, lead (Pb), carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide
(802), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), PMio, and PMio-2.5-7 Of these pollutants, ozone has the most
6 State and local agencies have costs associated with many activities within each monitoring program area. Not all types of
operating expenses may be accounted for. Some of these costs are fairly well understood such as capital infrastructure, salaries of
staff and management working on the program, and costs of expendable items used in the program. Less obvious, but important
to include in planning operation of a network, are costs of participating in conferences and workshops that support training and
building further expertise in agencies operating the network.
7 On October 17, 2006 EPA revoked the annual PM10 NAAQS everywhere. 71 FR 61144. The 24-hour PM10 NAAQS was
retained everywhere. No NAAQS was established for PM10_2.5. On the same day, EPA also promulgated a Federal Reference
Method for PM10_2 5 and certain monitoring requirements for PM10_2 5 as part of the new NCore network with an implementation
dateof January 1,2011. 71FR61236. A plan for PM10.2.5 monitoring at NCore is due by July 1,2009. FY 2009 grant funds
should be used to begin development of this plan. EPA is not requiring that any FY 2009 or FY 2010 grant funds be used to
implement PM10.2.5 monitoring, although that is an eligible use of grant funds where negotiated between a Regional Office and a
recipient.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C - 10 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
robust network with over 1200 stations across the country. Networks for CO, 862, NC>2, and
PMio are still maintained in most agencies with minor divestments over the last several years
(see figure C-2). However, for lead there has been a substantially larger divestment due to
almost all monitoring stations being substantially below the previous lead (Pb) NAAQS.
Beginning in 2010, the number of required lead started to increase as the source-oriented
monitors required by the 2008 Lead NAAQS and monitoring final rule became operational.
Additional information on each network is summarized below.
In March 2008, EPA strengthened the ozone NAAQS by revising the 8-hour standard to a
level of 0.075 ppm. However, EPA is now reconsidering the ozone NAAQS and on January 6,
2010 issued a notice of proposed rulemaking on this matter. Although a large and robust ozone
monitoring network already operating in most urban areas across the country, EPA has also
issued a proposal - separate from the ozone NAAQS - to address changes to the ozone
monitoring requirements. Changes to the ozone monitoring requirements are necessary to
implement the revised ozone NAAQS including changes to the required ozone season,
requirements for minimum monitors in smaller urban areas - where monitoring is not currently
required, and requirements for non-urban areas such as sensitive ecosystems. The proposed rule
was published in the Federal Register on July 16, 2009 and is expected to be finalized in 2010 in
conjunction with the reconsideration of the ozone NAAQS. We estimate that the new
monitoring needs for ozone will result in a total of 268 new stations. Of that total, 178 stations
will be at new locations with new monitors, while 90 stations will be monitors moved from
existing stations. Changes to the ozone monitoring season are currently proposed to begin on the
first day of the new ozone monitoring season in FY 201 1. Funding needs associated with
changes to the ozone monitoring requirements will be dedicated over a two-year period in FY
2011 and FY 2012.
Table C-2
Number of Monitoring Stations by Pollutant 1998 -2008
1,200
•5 800
I
= soo
— Carbon Monoxide
200:]:
Year
In October of 2008, EPA significantly strengthened the lead NAAQS from 1.5 |ig/m3 to 0.15
|ig/m3 as measured by total suspended particulate. For lead, the existing lead monitoring
Final Guidance May 7, 2010
AppendixC-11 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
network was considered inadequate to implement the revised lead NAAQS and therefore,
changes to the lead monitoring requirements were included along with the revised lead NAAQS.
EPA required that near-source monitors associated with emissions of more than one ton per year
begin operating by January 1, 2010 and non-source monitoring by January 1, 2011. However,
EPA is reconsidering the lead monitoring requirements by potentially adding a requirement for
monitoring near sources associated with emissions of between one half and one ton per year as
well as a change to the requirement for non-source monitoring. EPA will work with state and
local agencies to finish their lead network and proposes to dedicate approximately $2.7M to
$3.1M in one-time FY 2011 funds to support additional monitoring network expansions. The
final rule supporting the reconsideration of lead monitoring is expected to be finalized during the
summer of 2010.
On January 22, 2010, EPA strengthened the nitrogen dioxide (NO2) NAAQS with the
addition of a one-hour standard to capture peaks associated with short-term exposures to this
pollutant. This final rule provides for the implementation of a near-roadway monitoring network
for NC>2 at 165 new locations. EPA will work closely with States on planning this new addition
to the ambient air monitoring program.
On December 8, 2009 EPA published a proposal to strengthen the sulfur dioxide (802)
NAAQS. Ambient air monitoring would be required according to population and the amount of
SO2 emissions in an area. Additional monitoring would also be required based on the
contribution of the States SO2 emissions to the national total of emissions of this pollutant.
Note: In the proposed rulemaking, EPA is seeking comment on a two-year deployment.
In addition to revising networks for lead, ozone, NO2, and SO2, FY 2011 STAG grant funds
should be utilized for on-going ambient monitoring programs to support:
• National and local spatial characterization of ozone (O3) relative to the NAAQS;
• National and local public reporting of O3 in the AQI;
• Local public reporting of CO, SO2, NO2, and PM10 in the AQI for areas where these
pollutants are of concern;
• Operation and maintenance of NCore stations beyond the leveraged funds provided under
the PM2.5 monitoring program;
• Local characterization of the CO, SO2, NO2, and PM10 NAAQS in the few areas with
NAAQS non-attainment and maintenance issues;
• In addition to the monitoring provided for above, limited characterization of O3, CO,
SO2, NO2, Pb, and PM10 data in all other areas for long term trends, support for long-
term health and scientific assessments, and development and accountability of emission
control programs as part of a multi-pollutant approach to air quality management;
• Assessment of O3, CO, SO2, NO2, Pb, and PM10 data quality;
• Analysis and interpretation of the O3, PAMS, CO, SO2, NO2, Pb, and PM10 monitoring
data and development of data assessment tools;
• Procurement and testing of PM10 filters, including 46.2 mm Teflon filters used in low-
volume PM10 samplers;
• Independent and adequate assessment of these pollutants' data quality, which is required
in 40 CFR Part 58. This assessment is based on audit data generated under the National
Performance Audit Program (NPAP). State and local agencies will choose either to
Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C - 12 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
obtain audit services through EPA-managed contracts funded with STAG funds, or may
operate equivalent state-managed programs using independent staff, equipment, and
standards. In some regions, EPA staff may perform or assist in audits with no charge to
STAG funds, depending on staff and travel funds availability.
• Reporting and certification of ambient air monitoring data required8 to be submitted to
the Air Quality System (AQS) database. In 2010 the date of certification moves up from
July 1 to May 1.
Ambient Air Performance Evaluation Programs
A performance evaluation is a type of audit where quantitative data is collected independently
in order to evaluate the proficiency of an analyst, laboratory, or some or all of the component
parts of a data collection activity. EPA implements a number of performance evaluation
programs on behalf of the monitoring agencies. Two major federally implemented performance
evaluation efforts include the National Performance Audit Program (NPAP) for the gaseous
pollutants and the Pb-Performance Evaluation Program
National Performance Audit Program (NPAP)
The NPAP is a cooperative effort among OAQPS, the EPA regional offices, the monitoring
organizations that operate EPA-funded air pollution monitors, and the other organizations that
operate air monitors for example at PSD sites. The implementation goals of the NPAP are to
audit approximately 20 percent of the monitoring sites in the Ambient Air Quality Monitoring
Network each year.
Although it is a goal to visit every monitoring site generating data that has significance to the
air quality program within a 5-year period, among these sites there is an emphasis on auditing
higher priority monitors (e.g., sites prioritized for health risk reasons) more frequently. In 2011,
the requirement for adequate independent audits applies to sites with monitoring types not
designated as "non-regulatory. The NPAP program uses a through-the-probe (TTP) audit system,
where appropriate for the monitoring situation given a site's physical layout. This system has the
advantage of testing the performance of the entire monitoring sampling train including inlets and
manifolds, and provides station operators immediate feedback on the audit results.
Each year, monitoring organizations are asked whether they plan on implementing the NPAP
or would prefer continued Federal implementation of this program using STAG funds. Any non-
EPA audits arranged by monitoring organizations must meet the minimum requirements of being
adequate and independent. Additional guidance on demonstrating that a state-implemented
program meets these minimums will be provided in a memorandum early in the calendar year.
Under this approach EPA reserves a portion of appropriated STAG funds to cover potential
Federal implementation of the NPAP, based on the number of geographically separate
monitoring sites (not the number of distinct monitors) within each EPA Region.
The initial reserve of FY 2011 funds is estimated to be approximately $454,000. This is
based on EPA's current understanding of monitoring organizations' intentions for how NPAP
audits will be implemented in 2010. If the number of sites in a Region to be audited by EPA
1 §58.15 - Annual air monitoring data certification, and §58.16 - Data submittal and archiving requirements.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C - 13 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
staffer EPA-managed contractors is reduced because more monitoring organizations plan on
implementing a program of adequate and independent NPAP audits without reliance on EPA
contractors, and those organizations are assessed by the EPA regions as capable to perform the
NPAP by September 2010, a corresponding amount of STAG funds will be made available to the
regional office for allocation as direct awards. The amount of funds held by EPA to perform the
NPAP includes both a fixed cost associated with programs tools and equipment such as standard
operating procedures and hardware and variable costs such as the operator time and travel costs
associated with the number of audits conducted. The September 2010 cutoff date gives EPA
time to make necessary contracting and other arrangements for the audits it will manage in 2011.
Since the start of the NPAP through the probe (TTP) in 2002, capital equipment has not been
replaced or upgraded. With the NCore sites coming on line, the NPAP mobile laboratories will
need to replace analyzers and calibration equipment that will be able to challenge the higher
sensitivity equipment that is being implemented not only at NCore sites, but at routine
monitoring sites where monitoring organizations are replacing older equipment with the trace
level analyzers. Therefore, $135,000 is proposed to be allocated to outfit half of the NPAP audit
trailers in FY 2011, with the other half planned for upgrade in FY 2012.
Lead Performance Evaluation Program (Pb-PEP)
The implementation of a Pb-PEP is a new requirement starting in calendar year 2010 and it
provides an assessment of overall bias at the primary quality assurance organization (PQAO)
level. PQAO is defined in 40 CFR Part 58 Appendix A. The program will be a mix of one or two
PM2.5 PEP like audits with additional collocated sampling. The program will require the same
number of audit samples as required for PM2.5 meaning:
o PQAOs with < 5 sites require 5 audits (1 PEP, 4 collocated)
o PQAOs with > 5 sites require 8 audits (2 PEP, 6 collocated)
The Pb-PEP audits consist of the implementation of a separate portable TSP Pb audit sampler
that is placed within 2-4 meters of the routine Pb sampler, is operated by an independent auditor
and the sample is shipped to an independent Pb-PEP laboratory for analysis. For the collocated
samples, each quarter the monitoring organization field operator will take one additional
collocated sample and send this sample to the independent Pb-PEP laboratory for analysis.
Similar to the PM2.5 PEP and the NPAP, implementation decisions for Pb-PEP are made by
the monitoring organizations on an annual basis. EPA will draft a memo to the monitoring
organizations to determine whether they plan to self implement the Pb-PEP or utilize the
federally implemented program using STAG funds. Any non-EPA audits arranged by
monitoring organizations must meet the minimum requirements of being adequate and
independent. The definition for adequate and independent for Pb-PEP is very similar to PM2.5
PEP and the requirements were developed in the August 6, 2009 memo which can be found at:
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/npepqa.html. The EPA regions will collect this information from
the monitoring organizations and provide the information to OAQPS in time to redirect the
appropriate STAG funds for the federally implemented program.
Under this approach EPA reserves a portion of appropriated STAG funds to cover potential
Federal implementation of the Pb-PEP, based on the number of monitoring sites (not the number
Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C - 14 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
of distinct monitors) within each PQAO within a Region.
The amount of funds that would be reserved by EPA to perform the Pb-PEP includes both a
fixed cost associated with programs tools and equipment such as standard operating procedures
and hardware and consumables and variable costs such as the operator time and travel costs
associated with the number of audits conducted.
Photochemical Assessment Monitoring System (PAMS)
Required by section 182(c)(l) of the Clean Air Act, the PAMS program collects ambient air
measurements in areas classified as serious, severe, or extreme ozone nonattainment. Each
PAMS area collects data for a target list of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), NOX, NOy, and
ozone, as well as surface and upper air meteorological measurements.
• Monitoring rule amendments published on October 17, 2006 greatly reduced the
minimum PAMS requirements. The revisions were intended to require the retention of
the minimum common PAMS network elements necessary to meet the objectives of
every PAMS program, while freeing up resources for states to tailor other features of
their own PAMS networks to suit their specific data needs. Overall, the changes
significantly reduced the costs of the minimum PAMS monitoring requirements, but it
was not EPA's intention to require or encourage a reduction in the overall level of PAMS
monitoring.
Consistent with recent years, FY 2011 STAG funds will support four types of PAMS
activities: monitoring system implementation and operation including replacement of aging
equipment, data reporting to AQS, data analysis, and quality assurance. Also, regions are to
plan and as appropriate approve the use of some of these funds to replace or upgrade aging or
obsolete equipment. For FY 2011, about $14 million is targeted for operation of the PAMS
network. Of this, $10.5 million has nominally been allocated for program implementation and
operation, data reporting, and QA. Three and one-half million dollars has been nominally
allocated for data analysis by state and local agencies. However, Regional Offices have had the
flexibility to allow states to adjust this split and even to use a portion of their designated PAMS
funds for other purposes. Table C-3 shows the FY 2011 allocation of PAMS funds within the
regional allotments. These PAMS funds are included in the ozone category of the national
region-by-region allocation.
EPA is also working with its state and local partners that are involved in PAMS in an
assessment of the program. This PAMS assessment includes a workgroup of representatives
from EPA, state, local, and multi-state agencies. Outcomes of the assessment have identified
many insightful interpretations of the data, but also the need for additional follow-up work. EPA
will further consult with state and local agencies on the use of $150,000 that would be prorated
from each PAMS Region during FY 2011 for follow-up assessment and new data analysis work.
The PAMS program has been operational since the mid 1990's and as such for a number of
agencies the monitoring equipment is becoming significantly aged. Some agencies have been
able to upgrade or buy new equipment from within their existing, allocation; however, due to the
Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C - 15 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
high initial capital cost, many other agencies have reported they are not able to set aside enough
funds from within one year to purchase these large capital cost items. For FY 2011, EPA is also
proposing to reserve 5% of the PAMS funds ($700K) for the expressed purpose of purchasing
new capital equipment (e.g., gas chromatographs and upper air meteorology equipment) for
participating PAMS agencies. EPA will work with all PAMS agencies to set up an equipment
replacement plan over a multi-year period.
Table C-3. Distribution of FY 2011 Funds for PAMS Support
Region
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
National Data
Analysis
Equipment
Replacement
Totals
Number
of
PAMS
Areas
5
I1
3
1
22
5
0
0
73
0
Local
Data
Analysis
$726,297
$232,415
$348,623
$145,259
$290,519
$617,603
$0
$0
$1,162,075
$0
Implementatior
and Operation
$2,125,815
$571,060
$1,087,907
$366,848
$959,749
$2,061,029
$0
$0
$3,307,303
$0
24
$3,522,791 $10,479,711
Total with proposed
$150K set aside for
national data analysis
and $700K set aside
for equipment
replacement
$2,678,979
$754,701
$1,349,328
$481,020
$1,174,372
$2,516,030
$4,198,071
$0
$150,000
$700,000
$14,002,502
1 Shares one PAMS area with Region 3.
2 Chicago and Milwaukee have a combined network.
3 So. Coast & Mojave Desert AQMDs have a combined network
Notwithstanding a re-allocation, and in light of the recent changes in PAMS requirements,
regional offices should still re-examine the current split between data analysis
Final Guidance May?, 2010
Appendix C-16 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
and implementation and operations with their recipients rather than strictly adhere to the splits
shown in Table C-3. Regional offices may also consider other departures from historical funding
practices, for example providing more funds to a particular state in FY 2011 to support a needed
one-time intensive study, with temporarily reduced funding for routine PAMS monitoring in
other states.
EPA recognizes that the PAMS sites are a major source of data on air toxics including some
of the toxics that contribute significantly to the total risk from air toxics in some of the largest
cities. The regions, state and local monitoring agencies should keep this dual purpose in mind as
the plan network changes in FY 2011 and beyond. For example, as speciated VOC sampling is
reduced at type 4 sites, consideration should be given to moving to auto-GC sampling at the
remaining PAMS sites.
FY 2011 PAMS Activities for State and Local Agencies
The allocated PAMS funds should be used to meet the following objectives:
(1) Continue System Implementation
• Reduce number of monitoring sites and monitoring at remaining sites, while remaining in
compliance with revised PAMS regulations or approved alternative plans developed as
part of reconfiguration efforts.
• Operate remaining existing sites, including replacement of aging equipment.
• Continue to improve NOX monitoring, replacing NOX instruments with NOy/NO
instrumentation and/or more sensitive NO2/NOX monitors at select PAMS sites.
• Install and operate trace level CO monitors at Type II sites.
• Develop and conduct area specific ozone precursor studies based on area specific needs.
• Continue making surface measurements of wind direction, wind speed, temperature, and
humidity at all PAMS sites and additional measurements of solar radiation, ultraviolet
radiation, pressure, and precipitation at one site in each PAMS area.
• Continue making upper-air measurements of wind direction, wind speed, and temperature
at a representative location in each PAMS area. The upper-air monitoring program will
depend upon region-specific factors such that the optimum design for a given PAMS
region is expected to be some combination of remote sensing and conventional
atmospheric soundings.
• For PAMS sites collocated with NCore multi-pollutant precursor gas sites, the
meteorological monitoring data for ambient temperature, wind speed, wind direction,
relative humidity, barometric pressure, and solar radiation are to be submitted to the
AirNow program.
(2) Data Analysis
• Continue to develop and implement PAMS data analysis plans at the state and local
levels that demonstrate use of data, provide analyses demonstrating data analysis
products and results commensurate with allocated resources targeted for data analysis in
grant work plans and the minimum set of PAMS data analyses specified in EPA
guidance.
• Use PAMS data to develop and optimize control strategies in State Implementation Plan
for ozone.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C - 17 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
• Develop trends in ozone precursors, based on PAMS data that may serve to corroborate
"rate-of-progress" and accountability demonstrations.
• Use PAMS data to corroborate ozone precursor emissions inventories and to address
transport concerns.
(3) Data Reporting
• All PAMS data, including meteorological data, shall be submitted into AQS consistent
with 40 CFR Part 58.
• All PAMS data shall be identified in EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) as monitor type
'PAMS' or 'Unofficial PAMS'.
• Adequate procedures must be developed and followed to ensure proper validation of data
prior to submission to AQS.
(4) Quality Assurance
• All sites must have and operate according to a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP)
approved by an EPA regional office.
• Ensure that adequate and independent audits are conducted for FRM and FEM SLAMS
monitors at PAMS sites. These audits are discussed above under 'National Performance
Audit Program (NPAP).'
Air Toxics Monitoring
For FY 2011, the President's request includes resources for the support of national air toxics
monitoring and characterization activities. Funds are awarded under §105 authority to continue
support for ongoing air toxics monitoring activities initiated and conducted by state and local air
quality agencies. In addition, CAA §103 funds are allocated for the support of: (1) continued
operation and maintenance of the National Air Toxics Trends Stations (NATTS) Network, and
(2) community-scale air toxics monitoring projects (see Table C-4). Funding for NATTS and
community-scale projects is again being requested using §103 authority which enables 100%
federal funding.
Included in the NATTS program total are three supplemental program components: quality
assurance, methods and instrumentation, sample and equipment shipping and handling, and data
analyses using all available ambient air quality data for toxics with special emphasis on
observations from the NATTS and community-scale monitoring programs. These three
components are associated program support for all grants that support air toxics monitoring or
management activities. FY 2011 will be the eighth overall year of NATTS data collection, the
sixth complete year of NATTS data collection, and the fourth community-scale grant cycle in
seven years. The desired program objectives are:
• Establish trends and evaluate the effectiveness of air toxics emissions reduction
strategies.
• Characterize local-scale ambient concentrations that result when air toxics originating
from local sources concentrate in relatively small geographical areas, producing the
greatest risks to human health.
• Provide data to support, evaluate, and improve emission inventories and air quality
Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C - 18 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
models used to develop emission control strategies, perform exposure assessments, and
assess program effectiveness.
• Provide data to support scientific studies to better understand the relationship between
ambient air toxics concentrations, human exposure, and health effects from these
exposures.
In FY 2011, EPA proposes that approximately $4.1 million in §103 STAG funds be used to
fund operation of the National Air Toxics Trends Station (NATTS) Network during the period
July 1, 2010 - June 30, 2011. About $0.9 million is proposed to be used for quality assurance,
data analysis, sample and equipment shipping and handling, and methods and instrumentation
associated with the NATTS program.
The NATTS program component will continue to build on the established quality assurance
and methods protocols. Laboratory and field staff continue to work with EPA to ascertain the
optimum methods for capturing and analyzing core pollutants associated with risk, develop
performance based quality indicators to prove valid data results that will contribute to our
understanding of risks, and stabilize the measurements for all NATTS sites so that comparisons
across the nation can be made. Efforts to further improve methods for hexavalent chromium and
acrolein are anticipated to continue through at least 2011, and additional methods development
work may include how to best measure coarse particles (PM 10-2.5) for HAP metals and other
speciation components to complement the existing measurement of metals in PMio at NATTS.
The analytical community will continue to assess trends in air toxics concentration levels, relate
those data to associated risk levels, and explore relationships between these ambient and risk
levels to emission sources and changes in these levels to emission reduction efforts.
The community-scale projects are intended to better characterize air toxics problems at the
local level, particularly for disproportionately affected areas, and to address those problems
through local actions which complement national regulatory requirements. Such monitoring has
the potential to define the scope of local air toxic problems, measure what reductions have been
achieved through actions taken, and provide information needed for local policy development on
reducing emissions from particular sources. During FY 2011, OAR and OECA, working with
regional offices, will focus on further actions needed to reduce risks from air toxics in selected
pilot areas.
While aimed at meeting local data needs, EPA expects that data, results, and findings from all
community-scale projects will also be valuable to other areas and to the national air toxics
programs. Hence, a portion of the air toxics STAG funds are used to organize, summarize, and
analyze the air toxics data from the community-scale studies and the NATTS sites (and data
from other monitoring efforts) and to communicate the findings to all states involved in air toxics
management. This includes a data analysis workshop.
While EPA anticipates continued support for the characterization of air toxics hotspots at the
community level in FY 2011, EPA intends to further consult with stakeholders on the nature and
approach for such support. The Agency will produce supplementary information and guidance
for FY 2011. For further information regarding prior year community-scale air toxics
monitoring projects, including previous solicitations, successful project proposals and final
Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C - 19 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
reports, may be found at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atntic/local.httnl. For more information contact
Michael Jones in OAQPS' Ambient Air Monitoring Group at 1-919-541-0528, or
jones.mike@epa.gov.
The FY 2011 allocation categories and amounts are provided in Table C-4. The funding
allocation for operation of NATTS sites will be sub-allocated to the regions with state and local
agencies hosting those sites. The split of funding among the other listed line items may be
adjusted prior to the start of FY 2011 based on consultations with state and local air agency
representatives. Funds for other line items listed are anticipated to be used in nationally
administered support contracts or competitively awarded to eligible recipients for specific
activities.
Table C-4
Proposed FY 2011 Funding for Lead, National Air Toxics Trends
and Community-Scale Monitoring
$4,095,000
$320,000
$300,000
$180,000
$100,000
$3,153,000
$8,148,000
Operation and maintenance of existing and new NATTS sites.
NATTS Quality Assurance: includes periodic Proficiency Testing, targeted Technical
Systems Audits, and annual data quality assessment via centrally (OAQPS) managed
contracts.
Data Analysis: delineate and assess trends, data and network assessment to include
exploration / demonstration of monitoring data utility in providing local scale findings that
are useful in S/L/T air quality program management, and Annual Data Analysis Workshop
for EPA and S/L/T' s to share results; synthesize into annual report.
Methods and Instrumentation: support for improved air toxics monitoring methodology,
especially for priority HAPs for which methods either do not exist, or existing methods have
been deemed insufficient to meet end user needs; acquire new, upgrade, or replacement
sampling or analytical equipment on a limited, case-by-case, as needed basis in direct
support of NATTS.
Sample and equipment shipping and handling.
Community -scale monitoring projects: EPA is seeking comment on continued support for
monitoring projects involving "hot-spot" locations (i.e. significant potential for substantially
elevated ambient HAP concentrations arising from local emission sources).
Total Funding
IMPROVE Visibility Monitoring Network
The IMPROVE monitoring program supports the national goal of reducing haze to near
natural levels in National Parks and wilderness areas. IMPROVE monitoring sites collect data
on visibility, including optical, photographic, and speciated particulate data, though EPA
resources are only used for the particle speciation monitoring. EPA works with the Regional
Planning Organizations (RPOs) to help states prepare their SIPs for regional haze rule (these
were due 12/07). Data from IMPROVE sites are needed to meet the regional haze rule
requirements of states for monitoring Class I area long-term trends through and beyond the 10-
year SIP period (2008 to 2018), as well as being useful in the required periodic assessments of
progress towards the national visibility goal. States also use data from the IMPROVE network to
Final Guidance May?, 2010
Appendix C-20 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
characterize upwind and background PMio and PM2.5 conditions and to assess source attribution
for the PM2 5 and PMio NAAQS in nonattainment areas.
The IMPROVE network was started in 1987 as part of a federally-promulgated visibility plan
and operated by the Department of the Interior (DOI) under the direction of a multi-agency
federal/state steering committee. EPA expanded the original network in FY 1999 and FY 2000
from approximately 30 sites to 110 sites. The expanded network covers all of the Clean Air Act
Class I areas where visibility is important (except the Bering Sea area which is impractical to
monitor). EPA provides state/local air quality management STAG funds to the DOI to help
maintain the IMPROVE network because of the importance of IMPROVE data to development
of SIPs for both regional visibility and PM NAAQS attainment. The DOI and the other
participant organizations contribute in excess of $3 million of their own funds or in-kind
resources per year to support field operations and other monitoring at IMPROVE sites.
For reasons of convenience and/or consistency of data, a number of state, local, and tribal
monitoring organizations have historically chosen to ask the IMPROVE program to provide field
technical support and laboratory services for additional sampling stations at locations under their
control, using the IMPROVE protocols for sampler design, sampler operation, and laboratory
analysis. Data from these additional "state/local IMPROVE protocol sites" (currently about 60)
are managed and made public along with the data from the 110 sites in protected class I areas.
These additional sites are provided as associated program support. This arrangement will
continue in FY 2011. In addition, some federal agencies provide full funding for additional
IMPROVE protocol sites to meet various program or research objectives.
Tribal, state, local, and federal monitoring organizations may continue, discontinue, or add
sites for the monitoring period which runs from April 1, 2011 through March 30, 2012. Once a
monitoring organization has identified its source of funds for such sites, it may contact OAQPS
(see below) to request monitoring support services and to begin arranging for the necessary funds
transfer. Requests should be made as early in calendar year 2010 as possible, but no later than
December 31, 2010. OAQPS is assuming that that monitoring organizations will retain all
current state/local IMPROVE protocol sites in 2011.
After extensive testing to ensure data comparability, the IMPROVE steering committee
approved a change in carbon analysis methodology (both analyzer and protocol) to replace their
18-year old analyzer systems with new system for all samples collected starting in 2005. The
IMPROVE steering committee also mandated the development and approved for use a revised
algorithm for estimating light extinction from IMPROVE PM speciation data, that is expected to
be used by most (perhaps all) states in their Regional Haze Rule SIPs. A revised (incorporating
the latest data flags and edits) IMPROVE dataset required by the Regional Haze Rule for the 5-
year baseline period (2000 to 2004) was disseminated through the IMPROVE and VIEWS
(http://vista.cira.colostate.edu/views/). The Visibility Information Exchange Web System
(VIEWS) is a database system and set of online tools originally designed to support the Regional
Haze Rule. VIEWS provides easy online access to a wide variety of air quality data and
provides online tools for exploring and analyzing these data. It also is used to facilitate the
research and understanding of global air quality issues.
For FY 2011, about $2.6 million of PM2.5 monitoring funds appropriated under §103
authority and about $1.2 million of state/local STAG funds appropriated under §105 authority
Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C-21 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
are being proposed to support visibility monitoring at 110 IMPROVE sites and 7 sites collocated
with CASTNET. For more information on the IMPROVE program, contact Tim Hanley (919-
541-4417) or Laurie Trinca (919-541-0520) in OAQPS.
Planning Information for Ambient Monitoring on Tribal Lands
EPA respects each tribe's sovereign ability to identify its air quality goals and to make
monitoring decisions it deems appropriate for its needs. This section addresses issues for
consideration when conducting ambient air quality monitoring in the particular context of an
EPA grant work plan. There are no Clean Air Act requirements for ambient monitoring on tribal
lands, so tribes have flexibility in customizing ambient monitoring to address the many different
situations they face in terms of air quality and other environmental concerns. Whatever the local
situation, the purpose of any ambient monitoring should be to inform the public living in Indian
country about the quality of the air where that quality is in doubt, to assist the tribe in managing
its air quality, to help the tribe make the case that other governments or private parties need to
control emissions due to their effect on air quality on tribal land, and/or to help track the effects
of control actions to verify that they have addressed a problem.
For some tribes ambient monitoring may or may not be a priority for funding compared to
other air quality program or environmental program activities. If monitoring is conducted, a
tribe's interests can be best served when the type of monitoring is appropriate for the specific
situation. For a given tribe, some types of monitoring may be useful, while others may not be
relevant. With limited resources available, strategic planning based on thoughtful priorities is
needed. The EPA regional offices will be the principal EPA partners with tribes in this case-by-
case planning.
Over the last few years, EPA has emphasized that data from EPA-funded monitors on tribal
lands should be available to both EPA and the general public through the AQS or other relevant
national data system, once start-up issues are worked out and the data are reliable. EPA will
continue to work with tribes on workable alternatives for data preparation and submission. In
awarding grants to tribes with FY 2011 funds, regional offices are expected to make sure that
tribes will have a way to get data submitted, including QA-related data.
EPA has developed an Ambient Air Monitoring Strategy for State, Tribal and local Air
Agencies that re-examines how the national ambient monitoring programs can be more
thoughtfully directed towards their multiple purposes
(http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/monstratdoc.html)9. For the most part, this strategy addresses
situations and considerations relevant to states, rather than considerations relevant to tribes. In
FY 2008, EPA developed a document titled: Technical Guidance for the Development of Tribal
Air Monitoring Programs
(http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/tl/memoranda/techguidancetribalattch.pdf) with the intent of
providing tribes a better understanding of the ambient air monitoring process and to provide
information on resources and tools to help build and sustain and air quality monitoring program.
For 2011 and beyond, EPA may provide additional guidance specifically related to tribal air
monitoring. Any new guidance will continue to provide flexibility for tribes and regional offices
to address the many different air quality situations on tribal lands on a case-by-case prioritized
' The Ambient Air Monitoring Strategy was last updated in December of 2008.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C-22 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
basis. See: http://www.epa.gov/oar/tribal/tatn.httnl for information on the progress in developing
new guidance for tribal monitoring.
Technical assistance in conducting ambient monitoring is provided to tribes through the
Tribal Air Monitoring Support (TAMS) Center (http://www4.nau.edu/tams/). TAMS staff can
provide more specific information on any of the types of monitoring described here.
The remainder of this section provides general information that may assist tribes in clarifying
their objectives for ambient monitoring and getting started on planning monitoring to meet those
objectives.
Air Toxics Monitoring: This may be the type of ambient monitoring of most interest to many
tribes, because local sources potentially subject to tribal management can dominate exposures
and because public perceptions of air toxic risks can be strong. As with all monitoring, the
purpose of monitoring air toxics is to identify problems that merit action, plan what action will
be effective, and track the effects of the action to verify it has addressed the problem.
Interpreting air toxics monitoring data is not a simple task, since there are no bright legal lines
between "acceptable" and "unacceptable" air quality, as there are for NAAQS pollutants.
Interpretation can be more difficult or impossible if the monitoring location or the monitoring
schedule is not appropriate for estimating risk to residents. Each regional office has specialists in
risk assessment that can assist tribes in planning air toxics monitoring so that it is useful.
See http://www.epa.gov/air/tribal/airtoxics.htm for more information on air toxics from a
tribal perspective. See http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/airtoxpg.html for information on
monitoring of air toxics. See http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/nata for the 2002 National Scale
National Air Toxics Assessment website10; the information and links on this website may be
useful background when considering whether and what air toxics to monitor on a reservation,
even if no 2002 assessment was possible for that reservation due to lack of an emissions
inventory.
Monitoring for NAAQS Pollutants using Federal Reference Methods (FRM) or Federal
Equivalent Methods (FEM): This type of monitoring is primarily useful for determining on a
formal basis whether air quality in a given location meets or does not meet a national ambient air
quality standard (NAAQS), for example ozone, PM2.5, PMio, CO, 862, NO2 or lead. It takes
three years of data collection to make this determination for most NAAQS. Establishing
attainment status via FRM/FEM monitoring data can be important as it can affect the legal
requirements that apply to sources at and around that location. It can also affect whether a tribe
can pursue action to seek emission reductions from upwind sources beyond the tribal boundary.
Monitoring for certain NAAQS pollutants may indicate a need to reduce emissions within the
tribal boundary in order to protect public health of the residents, but in many cases it will be
obvious from an understanding of emission-generating activities that local sources do not cause
or contribute to concentrations near or above the NAAQS.
3 The 2002 NATA is the latest available as of June 2009.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C-23 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
On October 17, 2006, EPA promulgated a rule which lowered the 24-hour PM2.s NAAQS
from 65 to 35 micrograms per cubic meter. This change should be considered when planning
tribal monitoring, because the more stringent standard is more likely to be violated as a result of
local sources such as seasonal wood burning, wild fires, and prescribed burning than is the
annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA also revoked the annual PMio NAAQS everywhere (not the 24
hour PMio NAAQS). This change is expected to have no impact on tribes, as the annual
standard was rarely violated anyway. PMio and PM2.5 sources on reservations (wood burning,
fires, road and agricultural dust, etc.) could be a problem by themselves or on top of
concentrations coming from upwind areas.
In March 2008, EPA strengthened the ozone NAAQS by revising the 8-hour standard to a
level of 0.075 ppm. At the time of finalizing the ozone NAAQS, EPA stated its intention to
propose a separate rule to address changes to the ozone monitoring requirements that would be
necessary to implement the revised ozone NAAQS. These may include proposed changes to the
required ozone season, requirements for minimum monitors in smaller urban areas - where
monitoring are not currently required, and requirements for non-urban areas such as sensitive
ecosystems. As explained earlier no such requirements would exist for tribal nations. Despite
monitoring regulations not being required of tribal nations, the potential for these changes are
mentioned here so that they can be considered for implementation in tribal monitoring programs
in 2011, if available at that time. The potential for ozone nonattainment, if it exists, is most
likely due to upwind off-reservation sources. Tribal monitoring programs may have an interest
in characterizing both ozone exposure of their population as well as characterizing sensitive
ecosystems on their lands.
In October 2008, EPA significantly strengthened the lead NAAQS from 1.5 |ig/m3 to 0.15
|ig/m3 as measured by total suspended particulate. With a substantially stronger NAAQS,
regional offices and tribal monitoring agencies should work closely together to ensure that any
sources of lead exposure on or immediately impacting tribal lands have been identified and
appropriate steps are taken (ensuring the adequacy of the emission inventory and modeling
impacts) to determine if ambient air monitoring is warranted.
Before beginning any NAAQS monitoring, the regional office and tribe should consider: (1)
whether attainment status can be determined with reasonable confidence in other ways (including
passive monitors and other methods that do not qualify as Federal Reference methods but can be
sufficient for unofficially showing that concentrations are well below the NAAQS), (2) how
information on the attainment/nonattainment status once available could affect management of
the tribal air program, and (3) how long the monitoring should continue if it does or does not
show a NAAQS violation. Monitoring and use of data for NAAQS compliance purposes
requires adherence to all applicable monitoring, quality assurance and reporting regulations.
The EPA regional offices should work with the tribes to review the status and continued
utility of any FRM monitors which have been operating long enough to have to have reasonably
complete data. If attainment with a comfortable margin has been found and if there is no on-
reservation or nearby development that is likely to change the situation substantially, it may be
good to discontinue this type of monitoring in favor of other environmental management efforts.
Continuous PMi.s Monitoring - There are several types and brands of monitors that provide
estimates of PM2.5 concentrations on a continuous basis, without need for filters to be sent to a
Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C-24 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
laboratory for weighing. These are both less expensive to operate than a filter-based monitor and
can give information on air quality that tribal officials and the public can use in real time to
manage emission sources and personal activities. For a complete list of approved methods, see:
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/criteria.html. Continuous PM2.5 monitors with official status as a
FEM can be used for purposes of comparing to the NAAQS.
Passive Monitoring and Other Types of Screening Monitoring: A passive monitor is one
which "soaks up" pollution rather than actively collecting it on a filter or pumping it through an
on-site measurement device. This means they can be used where there is no electricity supply.
Also, the monitoring unit is usually inexpensive, so it is possible to place them more closely
together or over a much larger area than conventional powered monitors could possibly be
placed. Passive monitors are not suitable for formal designation of an area as attainment or
nonattainment but they can help a tribe understand the air quality situation on its reservation, for
example, what part of a reservation has the worst air quality and whether any part has
concentrations that approach health benchmarks. There are passive monitors available for a
number of pollutants including several volatile organic air toxics including benzene, ozone, CO,
and SO2. Time periods for exposing the monitor to the ambient (or indoor) air vary. The
monitors must be collected each sampling period and sent to a laboratory for chemical analysis,
so costs are not insignificant. Passive monitoring programs are usually of short duration because
of the field labor and laboratory costs, compared to automated continuous analyzers. They have
the advantage of requiring little up-front investment, however. EPA Region 6 has been in the
forefront of applying passive monitoring to a variety of situations on and off reservations. See
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/passive.html for more information.
Photochemical Assessment Monitoring: This is a very specialized type of monitoring related
to the ozone NAAQS, in which air samples collected in the morning are taken to a laboratory for
measurement of the concentrations of many individual hydrocarbon species including some toxic
gases. This monitoring is only done during the ozone season. The purpose is to help identify the
chemicals and sources contributing to ozone and the most efficient controls for reducing ozone
concentrations. It is unlikely that this type of monitoring meets any distinct tribal need. See
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/pamsmain.html for more information.
PM2.s Speciation Monitoring: This is a very specialized and expensive type of monitoring
related to the PM2.5 NAAQS, in which filters collected over a 24-hour period are shipped by
overnight express to a laboratory for measurement of various components of PM2.5 such as
sulfate, nitrate, elemental carbon, organic carbon, and individual metals. This type of monitoring
is done every third or every sixth day, year round. The purpose is to help identify the direct and
precursor pollutants and sources contributing to PM2.5 and the most efficient controls for
reducing PM2.5 concentrations. Most STN sites are in urban areas. This type of monitoring may
meet a tribal need, if a PM2.5 nonattainment (or near nonattainment) situation is confirmed
through simpler monitoring and its causes are not apparent, if high numbers of diesel engines
operate in or upwind of the reservation, or if sources of toxics metals in PM2.5 form are known or
suspected to be a health risk. However, if metals are a concern, it may be more appropriate to
sample for metals in PMio form in order to capture all the PM that enters the human thorax and
may affect health. Most air toxics monitoring programs sampling for toxic metals do so in
form. See http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/speciepg.html for more information.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C-25 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
IMPROVE Protocol Monitoring: IMPROVE stands for Interagency Monitoring of Protected
Visual Environments. The IMPROVE program is described elsewhere in this Appendix or go to:
http://vista.cira.colostate.edu/improve/ for more information.
Over the last several years, about 10 tribes have applied for and received grant assistance
from their EPA regional office to allow them to request the IMPROVE program to establish and
provide technical services for an IMPROVE protocol sampling station on tribal land. Some
tribal sites have operated for a period and then been discontinued. The grant funds needed to pay
for this are awarded to the tribe by the EPA regional office, but transferred to the IMPROVE
program through OAQPS. Once a tribal monitoring organization has been awarded funds for
such sites, the tribe and/or the regional office may contact EPA to request monitoring support
services and to begin arranging for the necessary funds transfer. Requests should be made as
early in calendar year 2011 as possible, but no later than March 31 in order to start or continue
monitoring on July 1.
IMPROVE protocol monitoring is the generally accepted approach to quantifying visibility,
and is the right approach if a tribe has a need for such quantification. EPA regional office staff
can assist a tribe in understanding how such data could be used for official and unofficial
purposes. Because the protocol quantifies carbonaceous material in PM2.5, IMPROVE protocol
sampling may also be of interest if high numbers of diesel engines operate in or upwind of the
reservation. IMPROVE monitors are not Federal Reference/Equivalent monitors, however, and
cannot be used for designation purposes or to officially trigger a requirement for off-reservation
sources to reduce their adverse impact on attainment within a reservation or other tribal land
area.
CASTNET Monitoring: CASTNET is a long-term monitoring network of more than 80 sites
located primarily in rural areas. This network is designed to measure status and trends in
deposition of particles, ozone, and other pollution emitted from facilities with tall stacks
(generally power plants), mixed in the atmosphere, and transported over long distances.
Ambient monitoring at CASTNET sites is supposed to reflect the overall effect of emissions
from many sources, rather than any individual plant. While there is likely to be no direct use of
such monitoring data in a tribe's own air quality program, a tribe may wish to host a CASTNET
site in order to help advance the national air quality program. Tribes presently operate three
sites. CASTNET is seeking to expand the number of sites in the western U.S. See:
http://www.epa.gov/castnet for further information.
National Atmospheric Deposition Program: The NADP program is run by the U.S. Geological
Survey, and collects data on the chemistry of precipitation. NADP wet deposition sites are
usually located such that there are no dominant nearby sources, which means that a site may not
be of direct use of such monitoring data in a tribe's own air quality control program for sources
on tribal land. However, a tribe may wish to host a NADP site in order to understand its air and
water quality as impacted by near and distant sources, and/or to help advance the national air
quality and water quality programs. A number of tribes currently are partners in this program
and have sampling sites on their lands. See http://nadp.sws.uiuc.edu/ for more information.
Mercury Monitoring: The NADP and several federal agencies including EPA are collaborating
on a technical framework for a nationally coordinated network of speciated ambient mercury
monitoring stations including both gas and parti culate forms of mercury. Data of this sort
Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C-26 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
eventually will be useful for calculating dry deposition and possibly for identifying the emission
sources of mercury. Once technical, administrative, and data handling procedures are developed,
tribes may wish to join this network. Tribes may also wish to participate in this development. It
is anticipated that a high level of on-site expertise will be needed to successfully operate a
mercury monitoring stations, even with centralized technical and QA support. More information
is available at http://nadp.sws.uiuc.edu/mtn/.
Smoke Monitoring: Tribes who use controlled or prescribed burning to manage forest or range
land, or whose populations are frequently affected by fires may be interested in monitoring
smoke concentrations either to help make decisions on when it is safe to burn, or to advise
residents of when to take action to avoid smoke exposure. There are no formal procedures or
standard techniques for such monitoring at this time, but portable monitors and satellite data
communication devices have been tested and found to be practical by EPA and several
governmental partners.
NCore Multi-pollutant Monitoring: The NCore multi-pollutant monitoring network is a
concept that will be turned into reality over the next year. Network plans for required NCore
stations have been approved and stations should be fully operational by January 1, 2011. The
network consists of approximately 80 sites which simultaneously measure a variety of gas and
particle pollutants, using continuous methods to follow changes during a single day, across the
seasons, and over many years. Most of these sites will be in urban areas and will be operated by
state or local governments. However, about 20 sites will be in rural areas, including a tribal site
which volunteered to host a rural site in order to gain a better understanding of its air quality and
to help advance the national air quality program. See
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/ncore/index.html for more information.
Program Support for Monitoring (National/Regional Monitoring Procurement Contracts)
EPA makes procurement services available to state and local agencies, via national or
regional contracts or interagency agreements, for a variety of support services and materials.
These services can be conducted as either associated program support or as in-kind assistance.
In providing associated program support, EPA works with regions, tribes, and state and local
agencies in advance to identify needs on a national basis and targets funds for the support before
determining the final Region-by-Region allocation of grant funds (i.e., pre-allotment). In
contrast, in-kind assistance is agency-specific and the value of the service is included in the grant
agreement of a state, tribe, or local agency after final agency-by-agency allotments are
determined. This approach requires the recipient provide an appropriate amount of matching
funds and meet other grant administrative obligations relative to the in-kind assistance. This
occurs when contract support is requested by a grant recipient after its grant is awarded. Most
support to monitoring programs is provided as associated program support, with the in-kind
support being used to increase the level of support above planned levels if unexpected needs
arise.
Traditionally, OAQPS works with regions to determine the level of funds that each state or
Tribe wants to allocate for the national procurement contracts. The services offered include
assistance in monitoring site set-up and laboratory sample analysis for nonmethane organic
compounds, urban air toxics, carbonyls, PAMS, and hazardous air pollutants; performance
Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C-27 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
evaluation (PE) sample support for agencies participating in NATTS; filters for PMio and Pb in
the form of total suspended particulates; PM2 5 filters; laboratory services for PM2 5 speciation;
IMPROVE monitoring services; and independent audits under the NPAP and PEP programs.
Audits are usually provided via contracts managed by regional offices. Other services and
materials are provided via contracts or interagency agreements managed by OAQPS.
A new opportunity EPA wishes to make available to monitoring organizations is to obtain
NADP technical support for speciated ambient mercury monitoring stations via EPA's
interagency agreement with the U.S. Geological Survey, as associated program support or in-
kind service. Organizations interested in this should contact Gary Lear of EPA's Clean Air
Markets Division (lear.gary@epa.gov).
Table C-5 lists categories and estimated funding amounts for associated program support not
previously identified under specific monitoring topics: site support and laboratory analysis for air
toxics and PAMS monitoring and filters for PMio. Typically final amounts to be set aside on a
pre-allotment basis for the forthcoming fiscal year are identified after EPA and states conclude
their grant negotiations in the preceding spring and summer. The amounts shown in Table A-5
are current best estimates. Final FY 2011 amounts will be based upon confirmed needs received
from the regions and their state and local agencies by early in FY 2011.
Table C-5. Preliminary FY 2011 National Procurement Contract Amounts
(For Certain Categories of Associated Program Support)
Preliminary FY 2011 Section 105 Contracts in Ambient Air Monitoring and Quality Assurance
Program
S/NMOC
Sampling
Sites (O3)
PAMS QA
Support (O3)
Carbonyl
Monitoring
(03)
UATMP Sites
(Air Toxics)
HAP Support
(Air Toxics)
All PMIOand
Pb Filters1
Sub-total
Region
1
$0
$38,368
$0
$0
$0
$3,765
$42,133
2
$0
$9,201
$34,866
$138,924
$0
$14,088
$197,079
3
$0
$12,268
$0
$0
$0
$24,042
$36,310
4
$0
$35,696
$0
$88,063
$0
$21,915
$145,674
5
$0
$87,584
$0
$59,705
$
$50,154
$197,443
6
$0
$9,201
$0
$0
$0
$16,381
$25,582
7
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$43,671
$43,671
8
$0
$0
$0
$120,538
$0
$25,459
$145,997
9
$0
$60,034
$0
$28,380
$0
$18,938
$107,352
10
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$7,383
$7,383
Totals
$0
$252,352
$34,866
$435,610
$0
$225,796
$948,624
Note: Funds for PM10 and Pb filters are calculated based on Jan 2010 request for filters. See separate spreadsheet for details.
(These STAG amounts are considered to be initial placeholders for FY 2011. The final level will depend upon a
more definite indication of needs from recipients and will be adjusted accordingly. Adjustments will necessarily
cause changes in the level of direct grant awards. Residual funds are always returned to regional offices for use in
direct awards to recipients.)
In general, funding that would otherwise go to specific agencies in the form of a direct award
at the regional office level can be identified in advance for associated program support. In
essence this reduces the direct award level to that agency. If associated program support costs
identified for a specific agency are not used or are less than anticipated then these resources
Final Guidance May?, 2010
Appendix C-28 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
would ostensibly be returned to that agency's allotment. However, for some associated program
support common to all recipients, there is a fixed EPA cost which does not depend on the
number of individual recipients. An example would be the PEP or NPAP programs for auditing
monitoring stations, which have fixed costs to pay contractors to maintain measurement
standards and keep standard operating procedures current. There may also be variable costs for
the contractor labor and supplies to make monitoring station visits. For audits, therefore,
changes in the number of audits within a Region will result in a refund of only the variable
portion of the cost of the station visits (i.e., the associated program support).
Another exception is that EPA considers the IMPROVE sites representing the Class I
visibility protection areas to have benefits for all state air grant recipients because of interstate
transport impacts and the responsibility of each state to protect visibility in every Class I area it
impacts. Individual states (or regions) therefore cannot "unorder" these monitoring sites and
receive back their operating costs. In contrast, the cost of supporting state/local IMPROVE
protocol sites is "refundable" to a regional office.
Centralized Site Support and Laboratory Analytical Services - The EPA will continue
coordinating centralized laboratory analytical services to support air toxics, organic compounds,
and PAMS programs in FY 2011 with those regional, state, and local agencies wishing to
participate. Examples of services available via this national contract include those listed below.
Speciated and Total Nonmethane Organic Compound Program (SNMOC/NMOC): The
SNMOC/NMOC program has been operating since 1984. The EPA continues to support a
centralized program for assistance to state and local agencies in the collection of NMOC,
SNMOC, selected toxic compounds, and carbonyl compounds. This program was initiated to
provide data for use in development of control strategies for ozone. As part of the SNMOC
/NMOC program, participating sites are provided with all necessary sampling equipment, which
they may co-locate with NOX monitors. The SNMOC/NMOC program consists of the following
base components:
• Base Site support for sampling equipment preparation, installation and training, problem
solving, and final reporting; and
• Canister sample analysis for 78 speciated NMOC or total NMOC.
Options include:
• Analysis for 60 toxic and polar volatile organic compounds (TO-15);
• Cartridge sample analysis for 14 carbonyl compounds (TO-11 A); and
• Concurrent analysis for both toxic and polar compounds and speciated NMOC at a cost
significantly reduced compared to performing the two analyses separately.
States collect the samples in canisters and/or cartridges and air freight them to Research Triangle
Park, NC, for analysis. The samples are collected each week day from 6:00 to 9:00a.m. during
the summer (typically June 1-September 30). In general, 96 samples are collected at each site
over the study period. However, additional samples may be purchased.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C-29 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
Urban Air Toxics Monitoring: To support emerging needs for information on levels of organic
toxic species in ambient air, OAQPS initiated the Urban Air Toxics Monitoring Program
(UATMP) in 1988. This program serves as an analytical/technical support program similar to
the SNMOC/NMOC program. The major purpose of this program is to support state and local
agency efforts to assess the nature and magnitude of various air toxics problems via collection of
24-hour integrated ambient air samples at six or twelve day sampling intervals, sample analysis
in a central laboratory, data reporting to EPA's Air Quality System, and site-specific data
analyses. This program continues to be highly successful, with excellent overall data capture and
data quality that meets well-designed program goals. The UATMP consists of the following
base components:
• Base site support for sampling equipment preparation, installation and training,
problem solving, and final reporting;
• Canister sample analysis for 60 toxic and polar volatile organic compounds (TO-15);
and
• Cartridge sample analysis for 14 carbonyl compounds (TO-11 A).
Options include:
• Canister sample analysis for 78 speciated NMOC; and
• Concurrent analysis for both toxic and polar compounds and speciated NMOC at a
cost that is significantly reduced compared to performing the two analyses separately.
Carbonyl Monitoring: Carbonyl sampling and analysis has been part of the monitoring support
options that the Agency has provided since 1990. While carbonyl monitoring support can still be
performed simultaneously with other program elements, the independent carbonyl option
provides more flexibility for special studies and saturation monitoring programs. The Carbonyl
Monitoring Program support consists of the following base components:
• Base site support for sampling equipment preparation, installation and training,
problem solving, and final reporting; and
• Cartridge sample analysis for 14 carbonyl compounds (TO-11 A).
PAMS and Toxics: PAMS support items will be available to include technical off-site and
on-site support (initial equipment set-up, on-site technical assistance, consultation, problem
solving, etc.); quality control (QC); and quality assurance (QA) program support (data
validation, standards acquisition, and data management support). VOC canister, carbonyl
compounds sample and concurrent toxics and speciated hydrocarbon analysis are also available.
The PAMS and toxics technical support program consists of the following base components:
• Technical site support;
• QA/QC support;
• Canister analysis support for PAMS compounds;
• Cartridge sample analysis for 14 carbonyl compounds (TO-11 A); and
• Concurrent analysis for both toxic and polar compounds and speciated NMOC at a
cost that is significantly reduced compared to performing the two analyses separately.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C-30 of 31
-------
Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
The PAMS automated analysis systems and/or multiple canister collection system purchase
and installation are the responsibility of the participant. The amount of support an agency can
order for the PAMS technical site support and QA/QC components of the program have been
divided into smaller increments so that state, and local agencies can order the exact amount of
support they require.
Other Hazardous Air Pollutant Analysis: The national monitoring support programs have been
expanded to provide for the measurement of additional HAPs to support the effective
implementation of the CAA and address the needs of other special studies. Analytical services
support is provided for samples containing specific HAPs, which are a subset of the 187
compounds listed in the CAA. Participants are responsible for providing all necessary sampling
equipment. The analysis among categories is based upon the specific needs of the state or local
agency. This support also will assist the states in implementing the new national ambient
monitoring network. Some of the available options under this category include:
• Canister sample analysis for 60 toxic and polar volatile organic compounds (TO-15);
• Cartridge sample analysis for 14 carbonyl compounds (TO-11 A);
• Metals (IO-3.5), hexavalent chromium (EPA Method), semivolatiles (EPA Method
8270C), PAHs (TO-13 A), etc.
Air Toxics Performance Evaluation Sample Support: Agencies that are participating in the
NATTS can receive PE samples on an annual basis. These can include VOCs, Carbonyls,
SVOCs and metals on quartz filters. The PE samples shall be generated and analyzed by the
national contractor and sent as "blind" samples to the participating agency. If an agency uses the
national contractor for analysis, the agency will not be able to use the contractor for PE sample
support.
For more information on Centralized Site Support and Laboratory Analytical Services,
contact Margaret Dougherty at 919-541-2344 (dougherty.margaret@epa.gov) or Michael Jones
at 919-541-0528 (iones.mike@epa.gov)
Particulate Matter Filters - OAQPS has historically purchased paniculate matter filters (for
PMio monitoring, total suspended particulate sampling used for Pb and other metals monitoring
and PM2 5 monitoring) through national contracts and distributed these to state and local agencies
across the nation. The economies of scale from this type of centralized purchasing, centralized
acceptance testing, and distribution of filters has produced lower costs than if state and local
agencies each purchased these filters through their individual agencies. State and local agencies
are responsible for providing information to the regions each year on the numbers and types of
filters required prior to shipment. For PMio filters, monitoring agencies will need to specify
whether the filters requested are to be used to support high-volume samplers (i.e., 8 in X 10 in
quartz filters) or low-volume samplers (i.e., 46.2 mm Teflon filters). For information on filter
purchases, contact David Lutz at 919-541-5476 lutz.david@epa.gov.
Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C-31 of 31
-------
Appendix D
OFFICE OF AIR AND RADIATION
2010 PRIORITIES
January 22, 2010
ADMINISTRATOR PRIORITY- TAKING ACTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE
In 2010 OAR will advance the understanding of the science of climate change and more
effectively communicate its impacts. We will apply the Clean Air Act regulatory authority to
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in ways that meet our statutory obligations by applying
common sense approaches that focus requirements on the largest GHG sources and use multi-
pollutant, sector-based strategies. In combination with our on-going efforts to continually
enhance and refocus our voluntary programs, these actions will encourage cost-effective, energy-
efficient operating practices, promote the development and use of innovative technologies, grow
green jobs, and most importantly, reduce air pollution that contributes to climate change.
Through these efforts, EPA will reduce GHG emissions in ways that promote the President's
vision of a clean energy future.
Communicate the Science of Climate Change
• Communicate the science underlying, and the impacts associated with, climate change, as
a routine part of OAR regulatory and voluntary programs.
• Explore other opportunities to communicate the science to the public, co-regulator
partners, and stakeholders.
Reduce GHG Emissions from Major Stationary Sources
• Mandatory Reporting Rule (MRR): Implement the GHG emissions MRR, issued in
September 2009, by providing training and outreach to affected sources, states and other
stakeholders.
• Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)/Title V GHG Tailoring Rule:
Complete the PSD/Title V Tailoring Rule to assure major industrial sources address GHG
emissions when being built or when undergoing major expansions or modifications. In
conjunction with this rulemaking, EPA will issue guidance on the Best Available Control
Technologies (BACT) for reducing GHG emissions from major industrial facilities that
are covered by PSD requirements.
• New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for Key Industrial Sectors: Consider
opportunities to reduce GHGs through NSPS for selected categories of large industrial
facilities, including: cement manufacturing, nitric acid manufacturing, petroleum
refining, oil and gas production, and utilities.
Final Guidance May 7, 2010 Appendix D - Page 1 of 6
-------
Appendix D
• Utility Strategy: Work with states, electric utility companies, environmental
organizations and other stakeholders to complete the Utility Strategy for reducing
traditional air pollutants, as well as GHG emissions, to transition to a cleaner and more
energy-efficient power sector that provides affordable and reliable electricity. The
Strategy, which will include replacements of the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) and
the Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR), will provide utility companies with a clear road
map of likely future emission limits for planning purposes.
Reduce GHG Emissions from Vehicles and Fuels
• Vehicle GHG Rule: Establish the first-ever emission standards for GHGs from all new
passenger vehicles beginning in the 2012 model year. This rule will be jointly issued
with the Department of Transportation, which is setting complementary CAFE standards
for the same vehicles. The rule is expected to be completed by the end of March 2010
and follows EPA's issuance of a positive endangerment finding in December 2009.
• Renewable Fuels Standards (RFS2) Rule: Complete in early 2010 the RFS2 rule
called for by the Energy Security and Independence Act of 2007, which will lead to the
use of increasing volumes of renewable fuels in the transportation sector reaching 36
billion gallons by 2022. The regulations include methodologies for determining the life
cycle GHG emissions for renewable fuels, thereby assuring these fuels will have fewer
life cycle emissions that the petroleum fuels they replace.
• E-15 Decision: Make the final decision in mid-summer on the petition by Growth
Energy that seeks a waiver under the Clean Air Act to allow ethanol to be blended into
gasoline at levels above the current 10 percent limit (i.e., 15 percent or E-15). If the
waiver is granted, promulgate, shortly thereafter, regulations establishing fuel pump
labeling requirements to assure consumers use the proper fuel in their vehicles and
equipment.
• Fuel Economy Labeling Rule: In late spring 2010, propose options for revising the fuel
economy labels on windows of all new cars and light trucks sold in the US to take
account of new vehicle technologies, such as electric hybrids, plug-in hybrids, all-electric
vehicles, etc., and the unique challenges they pose for consumers in terms of comparing
relative energy consumption per mile of travel.
• GHG Rule for Heavy Duty Trucks and Buses: Propose the first-ever GHG standards
for large trucks and buses in 2010.
Use Partnerships to Reduce GHGs
• ENERGY STAR Program: Enhance ENERGY STAR by implementing the new
Memorandum of Understanding with the Department of Energy and promoting the Home
Performance for ENERGY STAR Program.
Final Guidance May 7, 2010 Appendix D - Page 2 of 6
-------
Appendix D
• SmartWay Program: Implement improved supply chain-based carbon assessment and
tracking tools and complementary partnership solutions to achieve GHG reductions
across a broad range of the global goods movement.
• Methane to Markets (M2M) Program: Support and enhance M2M as one of our most
successful international efforts to reduce methane emissions.
• Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs): Work with the Department of State to phase out the use
of stratospheric ozone-depleting HFCs under the auspices of the Montreal Protocol.
• Support International Climate Change Mitigation: Support Administration efforts to
build capacity among developing countries to measure, report, and mitigate greenhouse
gas emissions and to promote market-based approaches.
ADMINISTRATOR PRIORITY- IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
In 2010 OAR will complete a number of rulemakings to meet our legal obligations and to
implement the Clean Air Act in a more timely way. We will improve our compliance programs
and coordinate with OECA on air enforcement matters. We will also take steps to improve the
effectiveness of our indoor air programs and our international clean air efforts. These efforts will
be undertaken in ways that maximize opportunities to work for environmental justice and build
partnerships with states, tribes and EPA Regional Offices.
In Addition to Other Rulemaking, Complete the Following Regulatory Actions Scheduled
for 2010:
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
• Issue revised NAAQS for nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide and ozone.
• Propose rules for carbon monoxide and particulate matter (PM) NAAQS. The proposal
for PM is based on an accelerated review of the PM NAAQS in response to the
Administrator's concern about the PM NAAQS set in 2006.
• Establish new requirements for ambient air monitoring for the lead (Pb) NAAQS.
Emissions Standards for Stationary and Mobile Sources
• Propose Clean Air Transport Rule to replace the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR).
• Set final standards for emissions of toxic air pollutants (under MACT) and propose new
source performance standards (NSPS) for Portland Cement.
• Propose and issue final rule for Industrial, Commercial and Institutional Boilers MACT
and area source standards.
• Propose and issue final standards for Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste
Incinerators.
• Set final standards under NSPS for flares and process heaters at petroleum refineries.
• Undertake multiple Residual Risk and Technology Reviews for toxic air pollutants.
Final Guidance May 7, 2010 Appendix D - Page 3 of 6
-------
Appendix D
• Issue for public review and comment an advance notice of proposed rulemaking on
reducing lead emissions from the general aviation sector.
Elevate the Importance of Indoor Air Quality
• Collaborate with the Office of Children's Health Protection, CDC and HUD to improve
our programs that address indoor air quality.
• Radon: Enhance the outreach, visibility and effectiveness of our programs to reduce
exposure to radon gas.
• ENERGY STAR: Support ENERGY STAR in efforts to ensure healthy building
efficiency efforts, as well as partner with OPPTS and OSWER to address common
challenges.
• Cookstoves: Develop domestic and international partnerships to enhance our efforts to
encourage the manufacture and use of cleaner cookstoves.
Enhance OAR's International Clean Air Efforts
• Develop strategic partnerships to (1) protect US air quality, (2) assist developing nations'
capacity building to reduce air pollution, and (3) promote related US national interests.
Protect the Public from Environmental Radiation
• Characterize radiation risk and update standards to ensure public health protection.
• Prepare for and respond to radiological emergencies.
ADMINISTRATOR PRIORITY- EXPANDING THE CONVERSATION ON
ENVIRONMENTALISM AND WORKING FOR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
Consistent with the Administrator's focus on environmental justice, OAR will not only consider
environmental justice in its future rulemakings, we will work with OECA and OGC to focus
attention on sectors that emit multiple pollutants and on activities that can result in significant
emissions of air pollutants and pose significant air quality concerns to local communities.
• Multi-Pollutant Air Quality Planning: Expand the use of risk-based, multi-pollutant
modeling as recently piloted in Detroit and develop other models that allow state, tribal
and local governments to develop more comprehensive State Implementation Plans that
address multiple pollutants in an integrated way. Such plans have potential to achieve
greater health benefits more cost-effectively and address significant population risks,
which is especially important in traditionally underserved low income and minority
communities.
Final Guidance May 7, 2010 Appendix D - Page 4 of 6
-------
Appendix D
• Air Monitors: Encourage and expand the placement of existing or new air monitors in
low income and minority communities that may be in close proximity to major sources of
air pollution.
• School Air Toxics: Continue the Administrator's 2009 initiative to monitor toxic air
pollutants at selected schools around the country. Analysis of the results will be
completed in late summer.
• Leaks, Flares, and Malfunction Emissions: Focus rulemaking on the significant
emissions in and around low income and minority communities that come from
unregulated or under-regulated industrial flares, leaking equipment, open fugitive
sources, and malfunction emissions. Reductions in emissions from these sources will
help ozone nonattainment areas, reduce emissions of air toxics, enhance our climate
change efforts, and result in additional controls at these sources to reduce impacts on low
income and minority communities.
• Clean Diesel Grants: Successfully award grants under ARRA/DERA authority to
reduce PM, NOx and VOCs from the existing diesel fleet across the country with
emphasis in and around low income and minority communities.
• Goods Movement: Work with the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council
and EPA Regional Offices to address the serious public health concerns associated with
freight distribution across the U.S, using our National Clean Diesel Campaign and
SmartWay Program tools to cut air pollution through the entire system of transportation
facilities, seaports, airports, railways, truck lanes, and border facilities.
ADMINISTRATOR PRIORITY- BUILDING STRONG STATE AND TRIBAL
PARTNERSHIPS
A significant amount of air quality and climate work has been or will be delegated to the EPA
Regional Offices, states and tribes, and they need assistance in addressing that workload. As a
result of resource constraints, OAR program offices have not completed all of the necessary
guidance documents and regulations to allow the Regions, states and tribes to keep pace with all
their implementation efforts. To address this issue, OAR will explore a number of efforts.
• Enhance OAR's Ability to Provide Needed and Timely Guidance: Review the
priorities that the Regions provided to OAR in 2009 and prepare guidance that Regions
can use to support State and Tribal efforts to improve the effectiveness of SIPs and
emission control programs. As part of this effort, ask States, Tribes and other
stakeholders for their suggestions on guidance that EPA should be providing in support
of our regulatory programs.
• Improve Processes; Reduce Administrative Burdens: Work with the Regional Offices
and states to streamline the existing air workload, using the LEAN process or other tools.
Focus on improvements to the SIP process and explore other areas, such as the Title V
Final Guidance May 7, 2010 Appendix D - Page 5 of 6
-------
Appendix D
petitions process, and opportunities to transition to a comprehensive, multi-pollutant
approach.
Additional OAR Priorities
Clean Air Act 40th Anniversary: EPA will co-sponsor a conference with the Bipartisan Policy
Center in September on the 40th anniversary of the 1970 Clean Air Act highlighting public
health improvements, technology advancements and remaining air quality challenges, including
climate and other energy-related issues. The conference will also feature a technology exhibition
to showcase major innovations and cutting-edge developments in air quality and energy
efficiency.
Refocus Resources Provided to OAR Voluntary Programs: Between OAR headquarters and
Regional Offices, significant resources are provided to support a wide variety of voluntary
programs. Given the changes in regulatory direction and increasing demands upon headquarters
and the Regions, we will examine our current programs and target our resources to ensure that
we are maximizing environmental results.
Ensure our Laboratories and Office Space keep pace with the Mission of the Agency:
We will strive to upgrade the capabilities of our laboratories with advanced technology
equipment and training opportunities for OAR personnel. We will partner with other program
offices and the Regional Offices to increase the energy efficiency of our office and laboratory
facilities and implement the requirements of Executive Order 13514.
Final Guidance May 7, 2010 Appendix D - Page 6 of 6
-------
Appendix E - Key Changes from FY 2010
Office of Air & Radiation
Appendix E
Change from FY 2010 Guidance Document
Reason for Change
Effected Pages and Sections
Priorities
Children's health, environmental justice, use of
Environmental Exchange Network are included as new
cross-agency agency priorities
Changes in NAAQS implementation priorities and ambient
air monitoring.
Work related to greenhouse gases is a new priority
Climate Protection chapter includes all OAR climate-
related activities; previously included only voluntary
program activities.
Administrator and Assistant Administrator priorities
Changes driven by normal sequence of events and
timelines related to revisions to NAAQS.
Administrator and Assistant Administrator priorities
Present climate-related activities in one location
Executive Summary, Healthier
Outdoor Air chapter, Indoor
Environments chapter
Executive Summary, Healthier
Outdoor Air chapter, Appendix C,
Appendix D
Executive Summary and Climate
Protection chapter
Climate Protection chapter
Funding
The President's FY 2011 budget request includes a total
of $390.72 million in STAG funds for outdoor and indoor
air grant programs carried out by multi-state, state, local,
tribal agencies, and other eligible entities.
A total of $309.08 million of this amount is targeted for
continuing air programs carried out by state and local air
agencies. This is a significant increase of $85 million over
the FY2009 level and $82.5 million over the FY2010
enacted level.
Funding authority for the PlVb.s ambient monitoring
program is proposed for transition over a multi-year period
beginning n FY 2011.
EPA is requesting a significant increase in STAG funds
to assist states, local agencies, and tribes with expanded
core, as well as new, program responsibilities. These
include: the development and implementation of plans to
address revised, NAAQS; ambient air monitoring
provisions related to new NAAQS; enhanced capacity for
agencies with approved or delegated responsibility for
permitting large sources of GHGs; and the continued
characterization of air toxics problems and
implementation of measures to reduce their risks.
Executive Summary
Healthier Outdoor Air chapter
Appendices B and C
Strategies
None
None
None
Annual
Commitment
Measures
Deleted OAQPS N12a, OAQPS N34, OAQPS M21,
OAQPS M23, OAQPS P07, OAQPS P08a, OAQPS P08b,
OAQPS T07, ORIA RAD 3, ORIA SIRG 4.
Added OAQPS P20, OAQPS P21, ORIA IAQ 7, OAP 7,
and OAP 8.
Measures were deleted because the activity being
monitored has been completed or superseded, or
because HQ and Regions agreed that ACS reporting on
the item was no longer necessary.
Added measures to capture new program activities or to
replace inferior measures that were deleted.
Appendix A
Final Guidance May 7, 2010
Appendix E - Page 1 of 2
-------
Appendix E
Change from FY 2010 Guidance Document
Tracking
Process
Contacts
Changed the following from non-commitment indicators to
measures: OAQPS N07, N08, N09, N10, N11, N29, N32,
N33; GAP 1.
None
New contacts for questions about indoor environments,
climate change, stratospheric ozone, and radiation.
Reason for Change
To minimize the number of non-commitment indicators
with targets.
None
Staff changes
Effected Pages and Sections
None
Appendix F
Final Guidance May 7, 2010
Appendix E - Page 2 of 2
-------
Appendix F
Program Contacts
Criteria Pollutants, Air Toxics, Multi-pollutant Planning, and Regional Haze: Jeff
Whitlow, phone 919-541-5523, email whitlow.j eff@epa.gov
Trading Programs: Doris Price, phone 202-343-9067, email price.doris@epa.gov or Larry
Kertcher, phone 202-343-9121, email kertcher.larrv@epa.gov
Mobile Sources: Courtney McCubbin, phone 202-564-2436, email mccubin.courtney@epa.gov
State and Local Air Grants: Bill Houck, phone 202-564-1349, email houck.william@epa.gov
unless a specific contact is listed in the guidance document.
Tribal: Barrel Harmon, phone 202-564-7416, email harmon.darrel@epa.gov
Indoor Environments: David Rowson, phone 202-343-9449, email rowson.david@epa.gov
Radiation: Jonathan Edwards, phone 202-343-9437, email edwards.jonathan@epa.gov
Stratospheric Ozone: Kristinn Vazquez, phone 202-343-9062, email
vazquez.kristinn@epa.gov
Climate Change: GHG reporting rule: Bill Irving, phone 202-343-9065, email
irving.bill@epa.gov, ENERGY STAR and related voluntary energy efficiency programs: Karen
Schneider, 202-343-9752, email schneider@epa.gov, mobile source programs: Courtney
McCubbin, phone 202-564-2436, email mccubin.courtney@epa.gov
General Questions: Mike Hadrick, phone 202-564-7414, email hadrick.michael@epa.gov
++ End ++
Final Guidance May 7, 2010 Appendix F - 1 of 1
-------
Draft Work Plan for Environmental Justice Draft 2-17-10
WORK PLAN OVERVIEW
GOAL 1: ENGAGE COMMUNITIES IN EPA DECISIONMAKING: ENLIST OUR
PARTNERS TO MEET COMMUNITY NEEDS
Goal Description: "Open the Doors" of EPA to communities of color, Native Americans, the poor,
and other historically underrepresented and actively engage community groups, other federal
agencies, states, local governments, and tribal governments to recognize, support and advance
environmental protection and public health for vulnerable communities.
Objective 1: Actively engage and increase the effectiveness of the Agency's Federal
Advisory Committees (FACAs) in providing advice to Agency decision-makers on issues that
are important to Environmental Justice groups and communities.
Objective 2: "Open the Doors of EPA" by giving community groups access to Agency
officials to discuss problems that arise at sites or facilities EPA is involved with, and to provide
communities with an opportunity to be heard and to suggest solutions to environmental problems
for which EPA is a decision-maker.
Objective 3: Engage other federal agencies to recognize, support and advance EJ goals,
by engaging them in discussion and seeking their commitment to work with us to address site-
specific EJ issues in which they are involved and general issues within their jurisdiction
Objective 4: Encourage and support state partners to recognize and address EJ issues
that arise in federal environmental programs implemented by states.
Objective 5: Respond promptly to Title VI complaints and clean out backlog.
GOAL 2: SUPPORT COMMUNITY EFFORTS TO BUILD HEALTHY, SUSTAINABLE
AND GREEN NEIGHBORHOODS
Goal Description: Empower vulnerable communities to protect themselves from environmental
harms and to build healthy and sustainable neighborhoods that enable disadvantaged groups to
participate in the New Green Economy.
Objective 1: Provide EPA community grants to foster healthy and sustainable
communities
Objective 2: Promote and support green development in vulnerable communities
Objective 3: Regional Initiatives to promote EJ goals and support community capacity
building
Final Guidance May 7, 2010 Appendix G - 1 of 2
-------
Appendix G
GOAL 3: APPLY ERA'S REGULATORY TOOLS TO PROMOTE AND ADVANCE
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
Goal Description: Incorporate environmental justice considerations in EPA's regulatory and policy
decisions by building a strong science and legal foundation and engaging the public in EPA's
decision-making processes.
Objective 1: Incorporate EJ considerations into EPA's rulemaking process
Objective 2: Strengthen science of disproportionate impact and cumulative risk analysis
Objective 3: Clarify legal authorities to address EJ concerns
Objective 4: Incorporate EJ Considerations into Permitting Guidance and Decisions
Objective 5: Incorporate EJ Considerations into NEPA Reviews
Objective 6: Incorporate EJ Considerations into enforcement targeting
Objective 7: High visibility agency-wide EJ initiative by all NPMs targeting important
problems using all regulatory tools including permitting, cleanup and enforcement
GOAL 4: STRENGTHEN INTERNAL EPA MECHANISMS TO INTEGRATE
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
Goal Description: Integrate environmental justice in all Agency programs, policies and activities by
strengthening communications and training, instituting management and accountability measures,
and fostering a diverse workforce
Objective 1: Develop a Communications Strategy (Internal and External)
Objective 2: Clarify Organizational Responsibilities among HQ and Regional offices
Objective 3: Incorporate EJ into NPM Guidance
Objective 4: Assure that Budget and personnel support is available
Objective 5: Develop metrics for all Actions to hold ourselves accountable for the work
Objective 6: Foster a diverse workforce at EPA
April 30, 2010 Appendix G -2 of 2
Final Guidance May 7, 2010 Appendix G -2 of 2
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Office of Air and Radiation
Responses to Comments
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
Commenter (s)
Location in I
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
Issue Area: Executive Summary
1. Our agencies were represented at the
referenced meeting between OAR and
National Association of Clean Air
Agencies and are aware of the topics
discussed. However, we do not know
how EPA intends to address
suggestions made in that meeting. To
the extent that EPA's ultimate
responses have impacts on local and
state air agencies and their programs,
the agencies should have an opportunity
to review the responses before this
grant guidance is finalized.
Metro 4, Inc. and
Southeastern
States Air
Resource
Managers, Inc.
p. 1
As a follow-up to the February 4, 2010 meeting between
senior EPA managers and representatives of NACAA, we
identified EPA and state and local representatives to lead
workgroup efforts on major issues. The workgroups will
communicate progress and results to partners and
stakeholders.
None required.
2. We concur with the multipollutant
planning priority under "State, Local,
and Tribal Planning." We appreciate
the commitment of Region 4 and
OAQPS in recent months to examine
more efficient and effective ways to
conduct air quality planning. We
encourage EPA to fully recognize and
support the desires of local and state
agencies to conduct consolidated multi-
pollutant regional planning. At the
same time, EPA should allow flexibility
to agencies to determine the best
combinations of pollutants that will
deliver efficient and effective air
Metro 4, Inc. and
Southeastern
States Air
Resource
Managers, Inc.
p. 3
An EPA workgroup composed of HQ and regional
representatives worked diligently and thoughtfully over a 2-
year period to develop a revised methodology that aligned
resources consistent with the CAA's major considerations of
the population affected, the extent and severity of air pollution
problems, and financial need. The workgroup also developed
principles to guide the development and implementation of the
methodology. These included relevance, equity, and
transparency. EPA believes that it has applied the principles
to the methodology in a manner that results in an equitable and
strategic allocation across the country. The approach also
reflects the valuable input received from state and local
agencies and multi-jurisdictional organizations during the
process. EPA will continue to consult with stakeholders
during the implementation, and any subsequent update, of the
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H - 1 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
quality improvements.
3. Under the Executive Summary
section's Cross-Agency Priorities, the
OAR Guidance states that "[Children's
environmental health should be an
intrinsic part of decision-making at
every level of the Agency" (see page
4). This is a view shared by Indian
Tribes as a whole which value their
youth as a link to the past, present and
future. Unfortunately, it appears from
the language of this section that the
EPA will be working closely with states
on children's environmental health
issues while excluding Tribes from the
conversation. As an example, one of
the actions called for on behalf of the
regions in FY 201 1 is to sponsor "joint
meetings with counterparts in state
environmental departments and health
departments to facilitate coordinated
actions to better protect children's
environmental health" (see page 5). It
flies in the face of reason as to why
Indian Tribes wouldn't be involved in
such conversations or why the Agency
has failed to acknowledge them as
integral and sovereign partners in
EPA's goal of protecting children from
environmental health hazards. The
NTAA therefore recommends that
Indian Tribes be included alongside
states as the types of jurisdictions
Commenter (s)
National Tribal
Air Association
Location in
Draft
Guidance
p. 4
NPM Response
allocation scheme.
EPA agrees. We intend to fully involve tribes in programs
addressing children's issues.
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
Tribes added.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-2 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
which the Agency needs to actively
engage with regarding children's
environmental health.
4. "Also, work with HQ and state and
local agencies to expand community-
based air toxics monitoring, particularly
in communities disproportionately
impacted by air pollution."
Comment: It is Virginia's
understanding that the community-
based air toxics funds were taken to
fund the Lead Monitoring /NAAQS and
the School Air Toxics (SAT) program.
Is it EPA's intention to fully fund the
Lead efforts, SAT and the community-
based monitoring effort? What criteria
will be used to determine "communities
disproportionately impacted"?
Virginia
Department of
Environmental
Quality
p. 5
EPA intends to provide funding for the lead monitoring
equipment with FY09 and FY10 funds redirected from the
Community Scale Air Toxics program. The Community Scale
Air Toxics program will resume in FY11 and is discussed in
Appendix C. Our intent is to review grant proposals submitted
as part of CSM program and take into consideration projects
where the community presents a case for being
"disproportionately impacted".
None required.
5. "For air toxics, OECA will focus on
excess emissions caused by facilities'
failure to comply with leak detection
and repair requirements and restrictions
on flaring, and to address excess
emissions during start-up, shutdown,
and malfunction events."
Comment: It appears that this refers to
a national enforcement initiative for
LDAR applicable facilities. There are a
large number of these facilities. Does
OECA intend to enlist the states in this
Virginia
Department of
Environmental
Quality
p. 4
We (OECA) strive to work with our state counterparts in al
our enforcement work, and are encouraging state participation
in this initiative.
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
AppendixH-3 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
effort?
6. NAAQS - Priorities for ROs -
Ozone, Lead, PM, and Regional Haze:
"... assist in designating areas for the
revised lead and ozone standards, . . . ."
7. We are not clear on why OAR sees
the need to single out Houston, TX and
Port Arthur, TX in the guidance to
highlight local impacts. Furthermore,
Region 6 is concerned that OAR did not
share their analysis that supports this
statement.
8. The National Radiation priority for
Regions only addresses states. See also
page 60, especially the last bullet.
Working with tribes should also be a
priority - uranium for example.
9. Children's Health: The last sentence
should be revised to include tribes.
This is an important issue for tribes. As
an example, several tribes in Tar Creek
area conducted blood lead testing to
determine risk/impact to children. The
Tribal Science Council has focused on
this issue and should be considered a
resource to work with EPA as well as
individual tribes.
10. Should include tribal
environmental departments.
1 1 . Suggested revisions to text:
Commenter (s)
Region 6
Region 6
Region 6
Region 6
Region 6
Region 5
Location in
Draft
Guidance
p. 2
p. 3
p. 3
p. 4, first
paragraph
p. 5, fourth
bullet
p. 6
NPM Response
Agree.
Nearly identical appears on pages 16-17 of EPA's FY 201 1
Congressional Justification budget. However, we will delete
the city names from the guidance.
Agree.
Agree.
Agree.
OAR has incorporated the revised language into the Great
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
Ozone added.
City names
deleted.
Tribes added.
Tribes added.
Tribes added.
Revised.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H -4 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
The Great Lakes Air Deposition
(GLAD) program is coordinated by the
Great Lakes Commission was
established to address the deposition of
toxic pollutants and to promote
coordinate efforts to reduce such
deposition and the resulting adverse
impacts on human and wildlife health
in the Great Lakes region. ... In
FY201 1, it is expected that many states
will continue to address mercury-
impaired waters with implementation of
their TMDLs as their desired outcome.
For more information on the program,
please contact Erin Newman in Region
5(312-886-4587).
12. The Agency requested more STAG
funds for tribes as well as for state and
local agencies. This should be
acknowledged even through the amount
of the increase for tribes was not nearly
as significant.
Commenter (s)
Region 6
Location in
Draft
Guidance
p. 8, first
sentence of
last STAG
paragraph
NPM Response
Lakes section.
Additional language has been added to acknowledge not only
the modest Tribal air increase but also requests for significant
increases in existing and new Tribal grant programs under
which air activity is eligible.
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
Revised.
Issue Area: Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs
1. The draft calls for Section 105 funds
to be used for the CAIR Seasonal NOx
Trading Program. We believe EPA
should fund the administration of the
program in the same way that the
agency funds administration of the Acid
Rain program - through EPA's budget.
In other words, the cost for
NACAA
p.ll
The Seasonal NOx Program under CAIR is not an independent
federal program administered on behalf of the states by EPA,
like the Acid Rain Program. It is a state program established
to enable 25 affected states and the District of Columbia meet
the obligations of their State Implementation Plans (SIPs) for
controlling transported ozone.
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H -5 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
administering CAIR's seasonal and
annual trading programs should be
absorbed by EPA's budget, not Section
105 grants.
2. As EPA moves forward with
regulatory actions to control utility
emissions, there will be opportunities
for EPA to strategize with its local/state
agency partners. There are many
important decisions to make regarding
various pollutants. The value of an
integrated and coordinated approach is
substantial, both to the regulated
community and to the implementing
agencies. We encourage EPA to design
a mechanism that will allow co-
regulators to participate in the
development of utility emission
reduction strategies.
Metro 4, Inc. and
Southeastern
States Air
Resource
Managers, Inc.
p. 10
EPA concurs that the implementation of regulatory actions to
reduce air pollutant emissions benefits from the involvement
of local/state agency partners as well as the regulated
community and other stakeholders during the formative stages
of this process. EPA encourages its local/state partners to
recommend specific participatory mechanisms to facilitate the
development of an integrated multi-pollutant approach based
on their experiences in working with co-regulators who have
similar environmental goals but differing authorities and
jurisdictions.
None required.
3. Table 1 outlines funding
contributions required of EPA regions
and respective states for the CAIR
Seasonal NOx Trading Program. While
we cannot disagree with the logic that
the cost of the trading program is
determined by the number of sources
that have to be tracked in the system,
we respectfully object to this funding
being taken from the agency grant
funds. We have expressed concern to
EPA in the past about this practice. We
suggest that EPA's own budget should
Metro 4, Inc. and
Southeastern
States Air
Resource
Managers, Inc.
p. 13
The Seasonal NOx Program under CAIR is not an independent
federal program administered on behalf of the states by EPA,
like the Acid Rain Program. It is a state program established
to enable 25 affected states and the District of Columbia meet
the obligations of their State Implementation Plans (SIPs) for
controlling transported ozone.
EPA plans to reassess the current method for determining
appropriate regional and state contributions to program
operations contract costs when finalizing a replacement
Transport Rule. EPA will evaluate this workload allocation
issue that has been raised by the southeastern agencies as well
as other comments and program factors during the
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-6 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
support such programs mandated by its
own regulatory efforts. If funding is
not allocated from the EPA budget,
please be aware that the southeastern
agencies are being assessed an off-the-
top grant obligation of 28.7%,
proportional to the number of
southeastern sources subject to the
trading program. At the same time,
grant allocations to the Region 4
agencies are not based on such work
load realities and obligations and we
only receive about 12% of the national
Section 105 allocation. As we
comment elsewhere, such disparities
and disproportionate allocations and
assessments need to be resolved so that
we can effectively meet future
obligations for funding the NOx trading
program if no alternatives exist.
reassessment.
Issue Area: Federal Support for Air Quality Management
1. We recommend that the priorities
for regional offices in FY 2011 include
addressing the backlog of SIP
submittals and exceptional events
submissions.
National
Association of
Clean Air
Agencies
p. 22
EPA is committed to processing SIP submittals and
exceptional events submissions, and intends to take steps to
reduce the SIP backlog. There are some instances where EPA
cannot take action on SIPs and exceptional events submissions
due to ongoing litigation and the development of additional
policy and guidance as a result of past litigation.
None required.
2. "The air toxics program includes
non-financial support to state, tribal,
and local air pollution control agencies
for: modeling, inventories, monitoring,
assessments, strategy and program
Virginia
Department of
Environmental
Quality
p. 19
The non-financial support includes all support EPA offers to
state, local, and tribal agencies outside of direct grant support.
The non-financial support includes training, and support in
completing technical tasks (emission inventories, monitoring,
and modeling). EPA HQ and regional offices work closely
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H -7 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
development; community-based toxics
programs;"
Comment: It is unclear as to what is
being referred to here. What is the non-
financial support for emissions
inventories for toxics? The
Assessments referred to here must be
risk assessments. Is the non-financial
support development of residual risk
standards? Program development?
3. "In FY 20 10, EPA finalized
rulemaking for the NAAQS for
nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and plans to
finalize rulemaking for ozone in August
2010. EPA plans to place greater
emphasis on integrating across OAR
programs, specifically as it relates to
energy issues and air quality planning.
EPA will provide opportunities for
greater collaboration with states, tribes
and other federal agencies in addressing
these air quality problems and
continued emphasis on innovative
strategies to improve air quality."
Comment: This description needs a
little clarification. How does the final
rulemaking for NO2 and ozone lead to
a greater emphasis on energy issues and
planning which then leads to greater
collaboration on air quality problems?
Please explain.
Commenter (s)
Virginia
Department of
Environmental
Quality
Location in
Draft
Guidance
p. 19
NPM Response
with state, local, and tribal agencies to ensure the air toxics
program is implemented effectively.
Many issues related to the NAAQS for NO2 and ozone cannot
be traced to a particular type of emission (stationary or
mobile). OAR intends to ensure that strategies for reducing
ambient concentrations of NO2 and ozone encompass the wide
variety of contributors. Effective control strategies will have
to address both stationary and mobile sources to ensure
attainment of these more stringent standards.
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
AppendixH-8 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
4. "Provide technical and policy
guidance to regions on implementing
the lead, NO2, and SO2 NAAQS."
Comment: Headquarters should
provide guidance on the impact of the
new source -oriented aspects of the new
NAAQS standards. The new standards
are forcing changes and expansions to
the existing ambient network in most
states based on having to place
monitors in a manner that is single
source (or source category) influenced.
This philosophical shift in the
expectations of the ambient monitoring
network has potential implications for
the programs that impact stationary
sources such as permitting programs.
This change in approach to the
expectations for ambient monitors
needs to be articulated and evaluated as
far as its cross-program impacts.
5 . "Work with partners to improve the
technical specifications and procedures
for the National Air Toxics Trends
Stations (NATTS) ambient monitoring
network, to support short-duration
local-scale (also known as community-
scale) monitoring studies, and to
develop improved emission factors."
Comment: The intersection of the
NATTS program with Community
Commenter (s)
Virginia
Department of
Environmental
Quality
Virginia
Department of
Environmental
Quality
Location in
Draft
Guidance
p. 21
p. 25
NPM Response
Implementation guidance will be provided.
This paragraph will be corrected. The intention is that EPA
will work with partners to: (1) improve the technical
specifications and procedures for the NATTS; (2) support the
community-scale program; and (3) develop improved emission
factors.
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
None required.
Paragraph
rewritten.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
AppendixH-9 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
based monitoring needs explanation. It
is not clear how improved technical
specifications for the NATTS program
supports short term programs like the
Community based projects. Also, how
are emissions factors generated from
ambient data?
6. "Continue to develop and improve
risk assessments and management
methodologies."
Comment: Please work on developing
standardized approaches to Risk
Assessments from air monitoring data.
Virginia
Department of
Environmental
Quality
p. 26
EPA has developed an air toxics risk assessment (ATRA)
reference library for conducting air toxics analyses at local
facilities and in communities. This library provides
information on the fundamental principles of risk-based
assessment for air toxics and how to apply those principles in
different settings as well as strategies for reducing risk at the
local level. In addition to periodically updating this library,
EPA presents its risks characterization to the Science Advisory
Board (SAB) for further input and refinement. We recently
presented our risk assessment methodology for our residual
risk program to the SAB and are awaiting final feedback from
the panel.
None required.
7. "Work with states, tribes, and local
governments to: 1) implement a
residual risk program, and 2) assess and
address the combined impact of
multiple sources of air toxics,
encouraging voluntary reductions of air
toxics from indoor and outdoor
sources."
Comment: How does EPA intend to
implement a residual risk program
independent of a Risk Assessment
policy? "Assess and address" is vague
Virginia
Department of
Environmental
Quality
p. 27
EPA recently reviewed its residual risk approach with the
Science Advisory Board (SAB). The SAB suggested that EPA
evaluate risks in "broader context of aggregate and cumulative
risks...." To address this concern, EPA will consider other
risks in addition to the subject source category when
evaluating these risks. Existing tools, such as the National Air
Toxic Assessment (NATA), will help EPA identify and
quantify these external risks.
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-10 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
relative to some measure of the
combined impact of multiple sources.
The first step will be determining how
to identify multiple contributing
sources to an air toxics issue. Over all
this priority is difficult to understand.
8. "Conduct a grant competition for
community-scale air toxics ambient
monitoring projects. Provide guidance
to regions for negotiating individual
grants to ensure that data meet risk
screening, risk characterization, and/or
risk assessment requirements where
appropriate given study objectives that
were material in selecting the project
for funding."
Comment: Any such guidance should
be provided to the states to assist in
putting together grant requests. Also
the expectations for stakeholder
involvement need to be clearly
articulated.
9. Under Regions, it is stated
"implement section 1 1 1,112, and 129
standards, including lll(d), 129 plans,
in areas where states do not." This
should be a joint priority under both
Headquarters and Regions as the
Regions do not have the necessary
resources to implement these programs
without assistance form OAQPS and
Commenter (s)
Virginia
Department of
Environmental
Quality
Region 4
Location in
Draft
Guidance
p. 28
p. 26-27
NPM Response
The request for grant proposals will clearly identify the
program objectives, requirements and selection/evaluation
criteria for eligibility, including risk screening, risk
characterization, and/or risk assessment.
Agree.
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
None required.
Change made
to include
cooperation
with HQ.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-11 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
OECA. This is also giving the states
the impression that they do not need to
take on these programs, as EPA will fill
the gap when in reality we may not be
able to accommodate.
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
Issue Area: State and Local Air Quality Management
1 . "Target significant resources to
recipients to develop, refine, and
maintain monitoring systems and
emission inventories which help
provide a clear picture of the nature and
sources of air pollution and help gauge
the impacts of preventive and
mitigative measures employed; ..."
Comment: This process should include
guidance on the use of ambient
monitoring systems as a means of
identifying specific sources of air
pollution. The NAAQS standards
currently under development include a
shift to source specific approaches to
ambient monitoring and clearly
anticipate that ambient systems will be
included in developing compliance
histories for facilities that impact the
source oriented monitors. The use of
the data generated from these source
oriented network for NAAQS
compliance determination and source-
specific compliance determinations
needs to be made clear.
Virginia
Department of
Environmental
Quality
p. 30
Implementation guidance will be provided.
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-12 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
2. "The President's budget request
divides the $85 million increase into
three components: $45 million to
support the expanded core state and
local agency workload associated with
implementing the additional ozone,
NO2, SO2, lead, and fine particulate
NAAQS and addressing risks from air
toxics; $25 million to address
development of state and local technical
capacity to address GHG emissions in
permitting of large sources identified
pursuant to regulation under the CAA;
and, $15 million specifically targeted
for the increased number of monitors
required by the new or revised
NAAQS."
Comment: Separating the ongoing
support costs ($45 million) from the
hardware costs ($15 million) appears
initially to be programmatically
expedient, the distinction is not clearly
defined when implementing new
NAAQS standards particularly in the
case of the new source oriented
monitoring portions of the new
standards. The hardware costs ($15
million) includes significant support
costs due to the purchase of not only
the monitors but new shelters, and the
associated construction/installation
costs associated with the new sites.
Commenter (s)
Virginia
Department of
Environmental
Quality
Location in
Draft
Guidance
p. 31
NPM Response
The $15 million targeted for new equipment is intended to
cover monitors as well as the establishment of monitoring
sites, to include shelters and associated
construction/installation .
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-13 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
3. "The $45 million is intended to
supplement the existing level of funds
that state and local agencies have been
using for continuing program
responsibilities."
Comment: It is difficult in the
implementation stage of these new
standards to know the entirety of the
cost of installing the newly located
monitoring systems. Clearly the
operating costs for states' ambient
networks will increase as the new
systems are put in place but the initial
costs of installation cannot at this time
be clearly delineated. It is better to
approach the implementing phase with
more flexible funding expectations
while transitioning to ongoing program
costs in the out years
Virginia
Department of
Environmental
Quality
p. 31
We will work closely with our partners on allocating the funds
to ensure flexibility while establishing and implementing
new/revised monitoring networks and their operations and
maintenance. This consultation will contribute to our ongoing
determinations of out-year monitoring resource needs as we
assemble our budget requests and program plans.
None required.
4. In the Grant Assistance to Co-
Implementers Section under Core
Activities, the guidance discusses the
multi-pollutant and regional nature of
air pollution and the need to conduct
increasingly complex analyses.
National Association of Clean Air
Agencies agrees with this assessment
and recommends that EPA fully
endorse regional and multi-pollutant
planning efforts. We encourage EPA to
support consolidated efforts and ensure
there are no impediments to efficient
National
Association of
Clean Air
Agencies
p. 31
Agree. As a follow-up to the February 4, 2010 meeting
between senior EPA managers and representatives of
NACAA, a joint workgroup will examine regional planning
needs. The workgroup will assess the best approach or
approaches to address air pollution control issues and needs
that are of a multi-jurisdictional or regional nature.
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H - 14 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
and effective efforts (e.g., through
multi-jurisdictional organizations and
regional planning organizations).
5. "The additional funding requested
for FY 201 1 will help defray the
purchase costs of new monitors for
ozone, lead, SO2, and NO2 for state
and local agencies. EPA proposes to
use the authority under CAA §103 to
purchase the monitors with operation
and maintenance costs being funded out
of the state and local agencies' Section
105 dollars. Air monitoring is
addressed in greater detail in Appendix
C."
Comment: While EPA is approaching
the equipment needs in a very
productive way by funding the
hardware needs from the non-match
103 program, the funding of operation
and maintenance from matching
program will need to be viewed as a
future years cost. The physical plant
needed to implement the new standards
will be larger than in past changes to
ambient standards because of the
significant investment in source
oriented network monitors. The current
ambient monitoring networks with
relatively few exceptions do not have
permanent source oriented monitors
except for those designated as source
Commenter (s)
Virginia
Department of
Environmental
Quality
Location in
Draft
Guidance
p. 31-32
NPM Response
EPA will work closely with our partners on the allocation of
funds for FY1 1 . We will use our statutory authority as
appropriate to provide funding for the new and/or revised
monitoring networks.
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H - 15 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
oriented monitors. It is not clear at this
point what the initial capital and
construction costs will be for the new
monitoring network requirements
imposed by the new standards. Clearly
initial and ongoing costs will need to be
addressed but the better approach may
be to provide all the initial outright
funding through the 103 program and
allow the anticipated transition from
103 to 105 programs serve as the means
of funding the ongoing operating costs
through the 105 program.
6. National Association of Clean Air
Agencies believes that it is important
for EPA to develop an allocation of
grant funds among activities and
regions that is fair and equitable. We
recognize that the formula EPA has
used in the past for regional allocations
is outdated and should be revised. The
proposed increase in state and local air
grants, assuming Congress appropriates
it, provides an opportunity for EPA to
begin distributing funds according to an
updated formula while ensuring that
state and local air programs are not
disrupted by decreased grants as a
result of the new allocation. The
recommended level of funding should
be sufficient to ensure that every region
receives a fair and equitable increase in
grants above its FY 2010 allocation.
National
Association of
Clean Air
Agencies
p. 32
An EPA Workgroup composed of both regional and program
office representatives worked diligently over a 2-year period
to produce a revised methodology that aligned resources
consistent with the considerations outlined in the CAA—
population affected, severity and extent of the AQ problems,
and financial need. The Workgroup also developed principles
to help guide the development and implementation of a
methodology. EPA has now developed an allocation scheme
which it believes applies the principles to the methodology in
a manner that directs resources both equitably and strategically
across the country. The approach also reflects the valuable
input EPA received from state and local agencies and multi-
jurisdictional organizations during its development and which
the Agency hopes will continue during the implementation of
the approach over time.
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-16 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
While the distribution of the grant
funds is ultimately EPA's
responsibility, National Association of
Clean Air Agencies looks forward to
continuing its discussions with EPA
about the reallocation.
7. National Association of Clean Air
Agencies recommends that the funds to
support the Diesel Emission Reduction
(DERA) provisions of the Energy
Policy Act of 2005 not be part of the
STAG account, since many of the funds
are not provided to state and local
governments. We recommend that the
funds be provided through one of
EPA's other accounts.
8. With respect to the distribution of
the DERA funds, National Association
of Clean Air Agencies hopes that EPA
will continue to keep the program open
to both attainment and nonattainment
areas. Many state and local agencies
have active diesel emission reduction
programs that apply outside of
nonattainment areas to reduce air
toxics, greenhouse gases and haze.
9. Throughout the draft document,
EPA acknowledges the need for
training for state and local air agencies
as new programs and policies are
introduced. We appreciate the
recognition of the importance of
Commenter (s)
National
Association of
Clean Air
Agencies
National
Association of
Clean Air
Agencies
National
Association of
Clean Air
Agencies
Location in
Draft
Guidance
p. 32
p. 32
p. 33
NPM Response
Congress determines the suitable appropriation for the Diesel
Emission Reduction programs.
Agree. We will continue to keep the program open to both
attainment and nonattainment areas.
EPA continues to allocate contract funds, staffing, and
material to support training development and delivery. All of
the state grant money held supports classroom and field
training. All EPA funding is used to develop training
materials.
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
None required.
None required.
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-17 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
training in the draft. Unfortunately,
there appears to be a disconnect
between the stated need for training and
the level of funding provided within
EPA's own budget. EPA notes that it is
diverting approximately $2 million
from state and local air grants to fund
training, but nowhere does it indicate
how much the agency itself is
proposing to spend on training. There
is a need for core training support at the
federal level, particularly for
maintaining, updating and developing
training courses and coordinating with
the state and local training coordinators.
For many years National Association of
Clean Air Agencies has recommended
that EPA fund training from its own
budget, and we have agreed to match
EPA's expenditures for training from
Section 105 grants during the transition
to full EPA funding. Unfortunately,
full EPA funding has not yet occurred.
In recognition of the importance of
training and the need for adequate
funding, as in the past, National
Association of Clean Air Agencies
recommends that EPA hold $1,995,000
in Section 105 funds off the top for
training and urges the agency to at least
match the Section 105 grant funding for
training from EPA's own budget.
Further, National Association of Clean
Air Agencies recommends that
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-18 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
adequate staffing support be allocated
within EPA to provide necessary
training services to state and local
agencies.
10. With respect to grant competition,
EPA states that co-regulator status is no
longer available as an exception to
competition for grants for multi-
jurisdictional organizations (MJOs).
This change was made by the previous
Administration. As we have
commented in the past, National
Association of Clean Air Agencies
disagrees with this view and believes
that co-regulator organizations, such as
National Association of Clean Air
Agencies and the MJOs, should
continue to be treated under an
exception to competition requirements.
It would be very inefficient for EPA
and those organizations to undergo a
competitive process when those entities
are each uniquely qualified to perform
their missions and were established by
their members for this express purpose.
There are no other organizations that
directly represent their members and
are able to carry out the national and
regional environmental and public
health objectives of their members.
1 1 . EPA is seeking specific comment
on how the proposed increase in
Commenter (s)
National
Association of
Clean Air
Agencies
WESTAR
Location in
Draft
Guidance
p. 34 and
Appendix B,
p. 4
p. 30
NPM Response
When EPA revised its competition policy the Agency also
committed to reevaluate its applicability to MJOs once
additional experience was gained using other available
exceptions. The Agency has determined that MJOs have been
able to continue to receive grants under the public interest
exception without difficulty. That said, the Agency is
continuing to reexamine the policy to determine whether
further adjustments in exceptions or exemptions from
competition for MJOs are warranted. EPA expects to clarify
the policy by the fall of CY 2010.
An EPA Workgroup composed of both regional and program
office representatives worked diligently over a 2-year period
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
None required.
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-19 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
state/local grant resources should be
distributed.
As the draft guidance suggests, these
proposed increases should be allocated
based on the increased workload each is
intended to address. In the case of the
$45 million targeted to address the
increased workload associated with
new and updated NAAQS, WESTAR
believes that much of this increase
should be allocated to develop regional
planning capacity in the western U.S.
EPA has historically allocated a
significant share of the national STAG
grant to fund regional planning in other
parts of the country over the past 20
years, and now western states are in
need of a commensurate level of
support. Our rationale is explained in
WESTAR's comments on EPA's 2007
proposal to revise the ozone standard.
In summary, WESTAR concurs with
EPA's intention to allocate the
proposed $85 million increase based on
the increased workload associated with
revisions to the NAAQS. Accordingly,
just as EPA has provided proportionally
higher resources to other parts of the
country in the past as they built
capacity to address regional air quality
issues, western state and local agencies
should be allotted a significant share of
to produce a revised methodology that aligned resources
consistent with the considerations outlined in the CAA—
population affected, severity and extent of the AQ problems,
and financial need. The Workgroup also developed principles
to help guide the development and implementation of a
methodology. EPA has now developed an allocation scheme
which it believes applies the principles to the methodology in
a manner that directs resources both equitably and strategically
across the country. The approach also reflects the valuable
input EPA received from state and local agencies and multi-
jurisdictional organizations during its development and which
the Agency hopes will continue during the implementation of
the approach over time.
In addition, EPA is planning on implementing the revised
allocation approach beginning in FY 2011 to respond to
current air quality conditions and stakeholder needs.
There will be additional opportunities to address the concerns
raised by WESTAR and western states: (1) The Agency has
established an internal workgroup to examine overall multi-
jurisdictional and regional planning needs and concerns.
Following the February NACAA-EPA retreat; the workgroup
will be consulting with states, locals and other partners
specifically on this matter; (2) EPA will continue its
consultations with state and local air agencies on the
implementation and periodic update, as necessary, of the
revised air grant allocation rationale; (3) EPA will continue to
work with its partners on implementation of specific funding
priorities in FY 2011.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-20 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
the $85 million to build similar capacity
in the west.
12. In the proposed 201 1 grant
guidance, EPA proposes to "form a
workgroup to examine the continued
need, available resources, and optimum
organizational structure for support of
broader, multi-pollutant regional
planning". While we agree that such a
discussion is needed, talking about
resources will not provide the funding
that is needed now for continued
operation of the regional planning
organizations (RPOs). EPA guidance
should explicitly commit resources to
support RPOs in 201 1, and those funds
should not come off the top of the grant
but instead should be additive to the
20 11 grant.
13. While EPA acknowledges the
workload challenges faced by state and
local agencies and further anticipates
workload to expand, the grant guidance
is effectively silent on EPA's
commitment to partnering with state
and local agencies to ensure a vibrant
and effective national training program.
The 201 1 grant guidance is vague on
EPA's commitment of agency
resources to support training, focusing
instead on their intention to consult
with state and local agencies on how
Commenter (s)
WESTAR
WESTAR
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
See response to #1 1 immediately above.
EPA continues to allocate contract funds, staffing, and
material to support training development and delivery. All of
the state grant money held supports classroom and field
training. All EPA funding is used to develop training
materials.
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
None required.
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-21 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
they will spend their STAG money "for
the support of CAA training". The
grant guidance should be amended to
address this deficiency to clearly
acknowledge EPA's responsibilities as
spelled out in the Clean Air Act to
"conduct and promote coordination and
acceleration of training for individuals
relating to the causes, effects, extent,
prevention, and control of air
pollution". In addition, the grant
guidance should be amended to provide
details on EPA's commitment of
agency resources that will be targeted
to support training.
14. The first bullet of the Program
Strategy Section on this page references
working with partners to target
available resources to problems causing
the greatest risk. We understand that
EPA has expended significant effort to
develop a revised grant allocation
process that is designed to accomplish
this goal - addressing the greatest air
quality concerns and the associated
costs to resolve them. Metro 4 and
SESARM have communicated with
Assistant Administrator Gina McCarthy
in recent months about the allocation
formula and our willingness to
participate in developing an
implementation process. We continue
to offer our assistance in this effort.
Metro 4, Inc. and
Southeastern
States Air
Resource
Managers, Inc.
p. 30
An EPA Workgroup composed of both regional and program
office representatives worked diligently over a 2-year period
to produce a revised methodology that aligned resources
consistent with the considerations outlined in the CAA—
population affected, severity and extent of the AQ problems,
and financial need. The Workgroup also developed principles
to help guide the development and implementation of a
methodology. EPA has now developed an allocation scheme
which it believes applies the principles to the methodology in
a manner that directs resources both equitably and strategically
across the country. The approach also reflects the valuable
input EPA received from state and local agencies and multi-
jurisdictional organizations during its development and which
the Agency hopes will continue during the implementation of
the approach over time.
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-22 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
Our agencies have an extreme interest
in this work and appreciate EPA
reassessment of allocation process so
that funds are distributed more
proportionally to regional workloads.
15. The sixth bullet in the Program
Strategy Section on this page references
supporting state and MJO efforts to
develop information and strategies to
reduce haze and improve visibility. For
several years we have been advocating
a multi-pollutant "one-atmosphere"
approach to emissions and modeling
analysis work. In fact, Metro 4 and
SESARM have been actively assessing
southeastern fine particles, ozone, and
regional haze using a consolidated
approach for several years and continue
to do so. We encourage EPA to support
consolidated efforts of this type and to
ensure that there are no impediments to
such efficient and effective efforts. We
understand that regional haze
provisions of the CAA may be so
distinct as to require separate mention,
but we wish to ensure that the multi-
pollutant analysis approach is fully
accepted by EPA. Lines of delineation
between interrelated programs need to
be eliminated where possible to allow
maximum flexibility for agencies
through their MJOs to direct funding
where it is most needed. One outcome
Commenter (s)
Metro 4, Inc. and
Southeastern
States Air
Resource
Managers, Inc.
Location in
Draft
Guidance
p. 30
NPM Response
Some regional planning organizations are chartered only to
address regional haze, and are eligible to receive federal
funding only for doing work to address regional haze. To
receive federal funding for broader responsibilities, the
regional planning organizations must revise their charter.
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-23 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
of the January EPA meeting with
National Association of Clean Air
Agencies referenced in Comment 1 is a
task to "discuss funding the Regional
Planning Organizations and the extent
to which the RPO mission should be
expanded (i.e., beyond regional haze)."
While evaluation of funding options
and mechanisms is a recommended
task, there should be no need to
evaluate a multi-pollutant mission. The
MJOs that formed the RPOs are already
actively involved in assessments of
other air quality issues besides regional
haze. The efficiencies of such
processes (doing work for several states
simultaneously instead of state-by-state
efforts) are already clearly documented,
as are the desires of the agencies to
pursue their air quality assessments
through such consolidated approaches.
16. The eighth bullet in the Program
Strategy Section on this page references
EPA providing support for training to
assist agencies in addressing their air
pollution problems. Over the past few
years, EPA has reduced its direct
investment in traditional core training
and has transferred much of that
responsibility (but no independent
funding) to regional MJOs. Local and
state agencies have been required to use
a portion of their STAG funds as well
Commenter (s)
Metro 4, Inc. and
Southeastern
States Air
Resource
Managers, Inc.
Location in
Draft
Guidance
p. 30
NPM Response
EPA continues to allocate contract funds, staffing, and
material to support training development and delivery. All of
the state grant money held supports classroom and field
training. All EPA funding is used to develop training
materials.
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-24 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
as personnel resources to support these
transferred efforts. EPA staff often
seek to attend training that the MJOs
offer because it is one of the most
convenient, effective, and affordable
training alternatives to which federal
employees have access. To its credit,
EPA offers much needed information
on new and emerging requirements
through its outreach program and is
actively engaged with the local and
state programs through National
Association of Clean Air Agencies in
national training strategy discussions.
However, there is a need for core
training support at the federal level,
particularly for maintenance of training
courses, managing course updates and
development, and interfacing with the
local and state training coordinators.
We encourage EPA to strengthen its
support in this area.
17. In the Grant Assistance to Co-
Implementors Section, EPA describes
in the introductory paragraph and
immediately below Table 2 the
increased investment of $82.5 million
in local and stage agency programs.
We commend EPA for suggesting
increased funding in the FFY 2011
budget. It is forward-thinking and we
fully support the additional funding that
has been proposed.
Commenter (s)
Metro 4, Inc. and
Southeastern
States Air
Resource
Managers, Inc.
Location in
Draft
Guidance
p. 30-31
NPM Response
We look forward to continued cooperation with our
stakeholders in addressing funding matters.
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-25 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
18. In the Grant Assistance to Co-
Implementors Section under Core
Activities, the guidance discusses the
multi-pollutant and regional nature of
air pollution and the need to conduct
increasingly complex analysis. We
concur with this assessment and suggest
that EPA fully endorse regional, multi-
pollutant planning efforts. It should not
be necessary to maintain separate grants
to support similar efforts to address
interrelated air quality problems. EPA
should accept SIP submittals containing
regional assessments of air quality that
contain state-specific information
instead of requiring states to obligate
limited resources to personalizing the
regional analyses on a state-by-state
basis.
Metro 4, Inc. and
Southeastern
States Air
Resource
Managers, Inc.
p. 31
Regional analyses that include state-specific information are
acceptable so long as they meet the requirements that apply to
individual states.
None required.
19. Also in the Core Activities Section,
EPA requests comment on the
distribution process for local and state
grant resources. We suggest that EPA
reserve 20% ($9 million) of the $45
million core program increase to
provide equity adjustments to the six
regions that stand to gain from the
recent workload and grant allocation
analysis. If $45 million in additional
funding remains in place in succeeding
years (which we request) and if EPA
will continue to award the requested
equity adjustment in succeeding years
Metro 4, Inc. and
Southeastern
States Air
Resource
Managers, Inc.
p. 31
An EPA Workgroup composed of both regional and program
office representatives worked diligently over a 2-year period
to produce a revised methodology that aligned resources
consistent with the considerations outlined in the CAA—
population affected, severity and extent of the AQ problems,
and financial need. The Workgroup also developed principles
to help guide the development and implementation of a
methodology. EPA has now developed an allocation scheme
which it believes applies the principles to the methodology in
a manner that directs resources both equitably and strategically
across the country. The approach also reflects the valuable
input EPA received from state and local agencies and multi-
jurisdictional organizations during its development and which
the Agency hopes will continue during the implementation of
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-26 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
(which we also request), the current
annual disproportionate allocation that
currently exists could be permanently
eliminated. The $9 million equity
adjustment that we suggest should be
distributed proportionally to the six
aforementioned regions using factors
developed through a comparison of the
relative change in regional allocation
percentages under the new formula
versus the old one. We project that
Region 4 local and state agencies would
receive slightly more than $5 million if
this process is used. We can provide
more details of our proposal and
calculations if EPA would be interested
in reviewing them. The remaining $36
million of new core program funding
after the equity adjustment should be
distributed to all regions consistent with
the workload demands that have been
identified in EPA's recent analysis.
20. In the Increasing Capacity for
GHG Permitting Section, EPA correctly
recognizes the need for additional
resources to prepare to meet future
local and state agency obligations for
permitting GHG sources. We concur
with the listing of activities that are
important to this effort; namely, staff
development and training, program
planning and analysis, source
identification, outreach to industry, and
Commenter (s)
Metro 4, Inc. and
Southeastern
States Air
Resource
Managers, Inc.
Location in
Draft
Guidance
p. 31
NPM Response
the approach over time.
EPA is working with NACAA to develop a draft allocation
methodology to distribute the funds. The factors mentioned
are being considered as part of that process.
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-27 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
responding to the public. We suggest
that EPA distribute the $25 million in
new funding to the regions proportional
to the levels of emissions from
industrial and utility sources or the
numbers of point sources of GHG
emissions. We have tried to obtain a
listing of individual sources by region
for these sectors but have been unable
to do so. We believe that the
distribution of GHG sources will
generally mirror the distribution of
GHG emissions across the regions. The
EPA web site
www.epa.aov/climatechanae/emissions
/downloads/CO2FFC 2007.xls shows
that Region 4 has 20-25% of total
national GHG emissions from sectors
that are likely targets for permitting.
We recognize that the purpose of this
funding is directly related to the
permitting burden that the agencies will
incur. We suggest that the funds should
be distributed accordingly.
2 1 . The draft guidance states that
additional funding requested for FFY
201 1 will "help defray" the costs of
new monitors ..." EPA further
proposes to fund purchases using
Section 103 authority and operation and
maintenance costs through Section 105.
Southeastern agencies have suggested
that the $15 million, while helpful, is
Commenter (s)
Metro 4, Inc. and
Southeastern
States Air
Resource
Managers, Inc.
Location in
Draft
Guidance
p. 31-32
NPM Response
EPA will work closely with our partners on the allocation of
funds for FY1 1 . We will use our statutory authority as
appropriate to provide funding for the new and/or revised
monitoring networks.
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-28 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
woefully short of what is needed to
cover the new costs with which they
will be burdened. Monitoring is the
single-most costly program that our
agencies implement. We encourage
EPA to reexamine the cost burdens
placed on our agencies and allocate
additional funding in the amount of $15
million, making for a total available
amount of $30 million, to off-set the
purchase costs of this equipment. If
there are purchases that can be deferred
to FFY 2012 while conforming to the
NAAQS schedules, we encourage EPA
to allocate additional funding for FFY
2012 to cover more of the monitoring
costs. Our agencies are concerned
about the plan to require O&M funding
to be awarded under Section 105. First,
there is not enough funding to pay for
equipment purchase and O&M.
Second, mandating a program that is
not properly funded and requiring a
match of 40% may create
impossibilities for some agencies. At a
minimum, there needs to be as much
assistance as possible provided to our
agencies so that the desired monitoring
network can be more fully deployed.
We suggest, at a minimum, that Section
103 funding be utilized for the first five
years for the new monitoring programs
that are being required. Since the costs
of new monitoring requirements are
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-29 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
directly proportional to the number and
locations of monitors prescribed, we
would accept an allocation process
designed to distribute the funding to the
states based on the numbers, types, and
costs of new monitors in each region.
22. Reference is made in the Clean Air
Act Training Section to "approximately
$2 million in STAG funds" being
targeted to support CAA training.
Many years ago, EPA budgeted about
$2 million from its own funds to
support training and local/state agencies
contributed a similar amount. If we
interpret the proposal correctly, it
suggests that EPA has targeted
local/state STAG dollars to support
CAA training. We encourage EPA to
provide additional funding as
mentioned earlier in this comment. We
further encourage EPA to separate
references to its own funding
commitments with those that are at the
discretion of the local/state agencies.
Metro 4, Inc. and
Southeastern
States Air
Resource
Managers, Inc.
p. 33
EPA allocates contract funds, staffing, and material to support
training development and delivery. All of the state grant
money held supports classroom and field training. All EPA
funding is used to develop training materials.
None required.
23. In the Regional-level MJOs
Section, EPA establishes funding
qualification criteria for MJOs. EPA
further states that MJO funding must be
consistent with its competition policy.
We understand the general criteria and
agree that there are many funding
sources within EPA that are designed
Metro 4, Inc. and
Southeastern
States Air
Resource
Managers, Inc.
p. 34
When EPA revised its competition policy the Agency also
committed to reevaluate its applicability to MJOs once
additional experience was gained using other available
exceptions. The Agency has determined that MJOs have been
able to continue to receive grants under the public interest
exception without difficulty. That said, the Agency is
continuing to reexamine the policy to determine whether
further adjustments in exceptions or exemptions from
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-30 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
for full and open competition. STAG
funds are not in the same category and
member agencies should be able to
designate portions of their funding to
MJOs without major complication.
EPA chose, with some external
direction we acknowledge, to make
changes to the competition policy in
recent years and those changes have
made it more difficult for local/state
agencies to designate portions of their
own STAG funding to the MJOs. We
believe that this more complicated and
cumbersome process is being
counterproductive by stressing the
resources of the awarding regions as
well as the MJOs. MJO work serves
the public interest and we are natural
extensions of the local and state co-
regulators/co-implementors. This
funding would not be going out for
competition if the MJOs did not exist.
It would be going to the local and state
agencies. We understand that EPA has
committed in recent months to try to
streamline the process to make it easier
to award funding to the MJOs. We
applaud such efforts. A consistent and
responsible approach that supports the
public interest in an efficient manner
and that minimizes the consumption of
agency resources should be applied to
the MJO funding process throughout
the EPA regional offices.
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
competition for MJOs are warranted. EPA expects to clarify
the policy by the fall of CY 2010.
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-31 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
24. In the Regional Planning
Organizations Section, EPA references
the work of RPOs on regional haze.
We would like to point out that all ten
states participating in the Metro 4, Inc.
and Southeastern States Air Resource
Managers, Inc. VISTAS project have
submitted draft regional haze SIPs and
nine of those states have submitted
proposed and final SIPS. We are proud
of the technical work that we have done
and of the efforts of our states to
incorporate those efforts into their
individual SIPs. In the cases where the
SIP submittals have been delayed, it has
been due to the need to examine
additional controls for BART sources
and/or to meet desired regional haze
goals. We applaud the work of the
VISTAS states to lead the country in
submittal of regional haze SIPs. As
stated earlier in Comments 7 and 10,
we believe it is time to merge the
terminology of MJOs and RPOs due to
the integrated, regional, multi-pollutant
work that they are doing. We would be
pleased to participate in a work group
to examine obligations and needed and
available resources. We are less certain
that the organizational structure needs
examination since the organizations are
structured as determined necessary by
their member agencies. However, we
are open to an analysis of what has
Commenter (s)
Metro 4, Inc. and
Southeastern
States Air
Resource
Managers, Inc.
Location in
Draft
Guidance
p. 34-35
NPM Response
Reflecting joint discussions with our co-implementors earlier
this year, EPA has agreed to more closely examine the nature
of, and best approaches for addressing multi-pollutant,
regional planning needs. The Agency has recently formed a
Headquarters-Regional Office workgroup and will continue to
consult with our co-implementors on this topic.
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-32 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
worked best and what could be
improved. We have utilized a
conservative and practical approach to
minimize costs while delivering needed
services and feel that we have been
responsible stewards of the funding that
has been made available us in the past,
for which we are very appreciative.
25. In the section on NAAQS - FFY
2011 Priorities is a bullet on the air
quality management plan pilot projects.
We look forward to reviewing the
reports of lessons learned and
interacting with the participating
agencies as well as EPA to identify
opportunities to better streamline the
SIP process. Integrating land use,
transportation, energy, climate,
environmental justice, and ecosystem
impacts are important, but we must
never lose our primary obligation to
manage air quality. In doing so, we
must use an integrated, multi-pollutant
approach and the requirements for
development, submittal, and approval
of SIPs must be streamlined. The bullet
immediately following the pilot project
bullet seems to be redundant and can
probably be removed.
26. The EPA acknowledges that Indian
Tribes may choose to develop and
implement their own air quality
Commenter (s)
Metro 4, Inc. and
Southeastern
States Air
Resource
Managers, Inc.
National Tribal
Air Association
Location in
Draft
Guidance
p. 35
p. 30-31
NPM Response
EPA is working on several projects to examine the benefits of
multi-pollutant approaches that also ensure that such
approaches fit within the confines of the Clean Air Act.
EPA will work with tribes to help them identify and address
their needs related to climate change.
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
None required.
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-33 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
programs (see page 9), with such Tribes
going so far as to permit greenhouse
gas (GHG) emission sources on their
respective lands. The NTAA
communicated this latter point when it
commented on the proposed Tailoring
Rule, also calling for the resources
necessary for Tribes to help regulate
GHGs under the Rule.
Indian Tribes are in a position to
regulate GHGs for stationary sources
such as the Navajo Nation and Southern
Ute Tribe. The NTAA therefore
recommends that the EPA back up its
climate change commitment to Tribes
with the necessary resources to help
them develop the technical capacity to
permit those sources identified under
the Tailoring Rule for their GHG
emissions, the same type of resources
being so generously made available to
states and local governments.
Resources to Tribes would not only
help them to effectively reduce GHG
emissions but would also help them to
curb the adverse impacts of climate
change facing the planet as a whole.
Without such resources, however,
Tribes will be forced to implement the
Tailoring Rule at their own expense, an
expense not easily incurred, or become
subject to a federal implementation plan
under which there may little flexibility
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-34 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
as to how business will be able to be
carried out in Indian Country or Alaska
Native Villages.
27. The OAR Guidance calls for the
formation of a workgroup to "examine
the continued need, available resources,
and optimum organizational structure
for support of broader, multi-pollutant
regional planning" (see page 35).
Based on the aforementioned benefits
that RPOs have provided to Indian
Tribes, the NTAA recommends that
Tribes should have an opportunity for
direct input into the workgroup
discussions in accordance with
Executive Order 13175, the 1984 EPA
Indian Policy, and the DOE American
Indian and Alaska Native Policy.
National Tribal
Air Association
p. 33
OAR recognizes and appreciates the benefits that the RPO's
provided to support the development of regional haze SIP's,
and continues to recognize the benefits offered by closely
coordinated regional planning involving states, tribes and local
air quality management programs. OAR is examining
approaches to continue this activity, and hopes to begin
discussions with all involved parties in calendar year 2010.
OAR encourages and appreciates tribes and the National
Tribal Air Association Executive Committee continuing their
involvement in this discussion and future activities.
None required.
28. With the potential increases to the
Section 105 allocations, concerns have
been raised by several agencies about
their ability to provide the required
40% match on these supplemental
funds. Some agencies have begun to
ask questions about having latitude to
bring in other sources of funding for the
match such as from the Title V area,
and still others have raised concerns
about the implications stemming from
raising their MOE levels because of the
additional match funds that they will
have to provide. In general, agencies
Region 4
p. 30-32
As a follow-up to a February 2010 EPA-NACAA retreat,
OAR has already begun been working with Regions and with
NACAA to identify implementation issues and develop
potential solutions associated with the utilization of increased
STAG funds as well as transitions in funding authority.
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-35 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
have for years raised potential MOE
concerns, seeking relief from the MOE
requirements or latitude to make
appropriate adjustments if EPA's
funding levels drop (e.g., between 2011
and 2012). Agencies have also
expressed their support for providing as
much funding for monitoring activities
under Section 103 including continuing
to provide PM2.5 monitoring grant
funds under Section 103, which
eliminates the concerns raised above
regarding match.
29. Region 4 supports continuing to set
aside funds " to make training grants to
air pollution control agencies and other
qualified entities related to the causes,
effects, extent, prevention, and control
of air pollution. " However, in Region
4, our State and Local agencies have
chosen to provide those funds to MJO's
(e.g., SESARM (supports training
courses for States), and METRO 4
(supports training for local agencies))
that facilitate delivery of training
courses based on expressed needs that
benefit the collective through pooling
of resources. However, the ability of
these entities to continue to accept
training funds in 2010, as well as 2011
is being directly impacted by budget
constraints stemming from the previous
grant competition waiver (i.e, co-
Region 4
p. 32
OAR and the Regions have provided additional input to OGD
on the relationship between state, local, and tribal agencies and
the MJOs they have formed including the nature of their roles
and responsibilities using STAG funds. OGD is currently
reexamining the Competition Policy's applicability to MJOs
and has held several calls with NPMs, Regions, and MJOs on
how to improve the policy. OGD recognizes the important
relationship that MJOs have with states, locals, and tribes in
helping carry out their responsibilities. OGD expects to
announce an updated Policy reflecting these considerations in
the fall of CY 2010.
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-36 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
regulator exemption and/or public
interest exemption).
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
Issue Area: Climate Protection
1 . National Association of Clean Air
Agencies recommends that EPA
coordinate closely with affected state
and local agencies before initiating any
technical assistance, compliance or
enforcement activities with sources
regulated by the state or local agencies.
This is especially important with
respect to state or local agencies with
planned or existing GHG reporting
regulations.
2. In the Tailoring Rule section, a
priority of EPA headquarters is to
develop guidance to assist permitting
authorities. As with all federal
programs, timely and detailed guidance
is necessary and we encourage the
agency to expedite the development of
this guidance. There is also a
commitment in this section for regions
to work with states in evaluating and
building permitting capacity. We are
pleased that EPA is addressing this
issue. We encourage the agency to
assist actively with the development
and delivery of necessary training as
this process continues.
3 . National Association of Clean Air
National
Association of
Clean Air
Agencies
National
Association of
Clean Air
Agencies
National
p. 45
p. 47
p. 48
We will coordinate closely with our partners.
EPA will issue guidance and provide training so that
permitting authorities are prepared to implement the Title V
and NSR programs.
We plan to continue our on-going conversations with States,
None required.
None required.
Language
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-37 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
Agencies urges EPA to coordinate with
or provide guidance to state or local air
agencies that are pursuing low-carbon
fuel standards in order to improve
understanding and identify any overlap
between the federal and state or local
programs.
Association of
Clean Air
Agencies
local governments, and other groups on our ongoing analyses
and rule developments related to the Renewable Fuel
Standard.
added.
4. The draft guidance does not include
a list of potential New Source
Performance Standards (NSPS) for
GHG. If EPA is not able to include a
list at this time, perhaps the grant
guidance could indicate that the larger
emitting source categories would be
assessed as potential candidates for
NSPS and provide a list of example
categories, rather than a definitive list.
National
Association of
Clean Air
Agencies
p. 49
EPA is obligated to periodically review NSPS for all
categories, revising them as necessary and appropriate. We
intend to consider GHG emissions in the course of those
reviews, but we cannot say for what, if any, categories of
sources would we establish performance standards for GHG
emissions at this time.
None required.
5. The draft document implies, but
does not clearly state, that the level of
efficiency or performance required to
receive the "Energy Star" label should
be increased. This should be made
more explicit in the final document.
National
Association of
Clean Air
Agencies
p. 50
Agree. We have added a clarifiying sentence to the end of the
paragraph in question.
Clarification
provided.
6. In the Mandatory GHG Reporting
Rule section under FFY 2011 Priorities,
regional responsibilities identified
include developing a list of facilities
that may be required to report,
developing a strategy for notifying
these facilities of those obligations,
participating in training sessions, and
presenting GHG reporting rule
Metro 4, Inc. and
Southeastern
States Air
Resource
Managers, Inc.
p. 46
Agree. We intend to work closely with our partners on this
issue.
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-38 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
information at meetings and
conferences. We concur with this
approach and request that EPA
headquarters and the regions partner
with local and state agencies to train
appropriate staff and strategize how
best to disseminate the required
information to all stakeholders.
7. In the Proposed PSD and Title V
GHG Tailoring Rule Section, a stated
priority of EPA headquarters is to
develop guidance to assist permitting
authorities. As with all federal
programs, timely and detailed guidance
is necessary. We encourage EPA to
fast-track the development of this
guidance. EPA should develop
simplified approaches to permitting
GHGs such as general permits and/or
presumptive BACT. There are many
uncertainties in the control options for
GHS sources at this time and having
some categorical standards of
performance would conserve resources
for our agencies. There is also a
commitment in this section for regions
to work with the states to evaluate and
build permitting capacity. We
acknowledge that EPA is beginning to
tackle this issue. We encourage EPA to
develop timely expectations for permit
conditions and control requirements for
GHG sources and further that EPA
Commenter (s)
Metro 4, Inc. and
Southeastern
States Air
Resource
Managers, Inc.
Location in
Draft
Guidance
p. 47
NPM Response
EPA will develop timely guidance and training for permitting
authorities.
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-39 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
assist actively with development and
delivery of needed training as the
capacity-building process continues.
8. The OAR Guidance states that EPA
regions will "[w]ork with HQ to assist
states in evaluating and building the
permitting capacity necessary to
address affected sources of GHGs" (see
page 47) and that the President's budget
request includes "$25 million to address
development of state and local technical
capacity to address GHG emissions in
permitting of large sources identified
pursuant to regulation under the CAA"
(see page 31) - i.e., the proposed PSD
and Title V Tailoring Rule.
Conspicuously absent from this list are
Indian Tribes, the same Tribes for
which the EPA has stated it will
"[d]irectly, and working closely with
the regions, support tribal efforts to
understand, assess, mitigate and adapt
to climate change" (see page 42).
9. If Climate Leaders is included as a
priority for the regions, it seems
inconsistent to not include it for HQ,
especially since HQ runs the program.
Green Power, a related program, is
included for both the regions and HQ.
Commenter (s)
National Tribal
Air Association
Region 5
Location in
Draft
Guidance
p. 47
p. 50, 52
NPM Response
OAR has greatly increased outreach to tribes on greenhouse
gas related rulemakings such as the GHG Reporting Rule and
the Tailoring Rule, while ensuring that they are involved in
discussions to develop rulemakings and that their comments
and interests are included and addressed. OAR remains
committed to working closely with tribes and supporting their
participation in all our programs.
Agree.
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
None required.
Revised the 5th
bullet under
Voluntary
Climate
Protection
Programs.
Issue Area: Tribal Air Quality
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-40 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
1. I noticed in approximately (4) areas
that reservations was used only in two
areas but in the other two, it was
reservation and tribal communities in
the other two. Should this be
consistent?
Linda Robins,
Chickasaw,
Region 6
p. 42, 43, 44
We are amending the original language to use the correct term
in a consistent manner. Indian country properly describes the
jurisdiction of federally-recognized Indian tribes over their
lands.
Made changes
is several
locations.
2. Provide a complete listing of
acronyms and what they mean and what
agency they are under.
Ambrie Walker,
Chickasaw,
Region 6
Rather than a separate list of acronyms, we have tried to spell
out all acronyms at least once in each chapter where they
appear.
None required.
3. It seems that the part for the tribes is
reporting to the grant or agency. Is that
the only role for the tribes?
Ambrie Walker,
Chickasaw,
Region 6
Tribes are only required to report to EPA as part of their
obligation when accepting federal funding support. Due to the
unique status of federally-recognized Indian tribes, federal law
and trust responsibility and other obligations including those
based on EPA and federal government policies, including the
1998 Tribal Authority Rule, tribal participation in CAA
programs, while strongly encouraged, is voluntary, and while
tribes have an important role in CAA and voluntary program
implementation in Indian country, their obligations to act and
report under this administrative grant guidance, are not
extensive.
None required.
4. As one its headquarters priorities,
the EPA states that it will "[d]irectly,
and working closely with the regions,
support tribal efforts to understand,
assess, mitigate and adapt to climate
change" (see page 42). The Agency
further states as one of its regional
priorities that it will "[p]rovide support
to tribal air quality assessment activities
such as emission inventories ..." (see
page 43). Up until now, the EPA has
failed to provide Indian Tribes with the
National Tribal
Air Association
p. 42
OAR is fully supportive of tribal participation in all of its
programs, including those associated with climate change
activities, as demonstrated by activities to date including
extensive outreach to tribes on rules such as those dealing with
fuels and GHG reporting requirements. While we are required
to prioritize competing resources to implement CAA and
voluntary programs to protect human health, resources and the
environment (in Indian country for this program), Regional
Offices are encouraged to make case-by-case decisions based
on their close relationships with individual Indian tribes on
how to allocate available resources to accomplish tribal and
EPA goals in the most efficient manner possible. At the
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H -41 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
necessary resources to conduct GHG
emission inventories, typically limiting
inventories to conventional pollutants
such as those controlled under the
Clean Air Act's national ambient air
quality standards. To be full partners in
addressing climate change, however,
Tribes need to know their carbon
footprint from which they can begin to
reduce GHG emissions and contribute
to the nation's overall effort to reduce
the adverse impacts of climate change.
The NTAA therefore recommends that
the EPA Regions work with Tribes to
provide them with the necessary
resources to develop GHG emissions
inventories.
region's discretion, this can and should include working with
tribes to develop GHG emissions inventories where
appropriate. OAR is also working to amend the Tribal
Emission Inventory software to further facilitate this task.
5. As one its headquarters priorities for
Indian Tribes and as the NTAA
recommended regarding the FY 2008,
2009 and 2010 OAR Guidance, the
EPA should establish a priority specific
to international issues. A number of
Tribes, specifically those on the border
of neighboring countries and those
along coastal waters, are impacted by
air pollutants from both near and far
away. As such, some effort on the part
of the OAR to address these emissions
would subsequently help to address
Tribal issues and concerns regarding
the air quality over the lands of Tribes.
At the very least, the NTAA
National Tribal
Air Association
We have referred your recommendation to establish an
international priority to EPA's Office of International and
Tribal Affairs, and recommendation to expand research, to
EPA's Office of Research and Development, for their
consideration in future planning and priority-setting activities
they may undertake.
Additionally, through the bi-national Border 2012 Air Policy
Forum, in which numerous tribes along the U.S.-Mexico
border are actively involved, members from both sides of the
border are working collaboratively to reduce conventional air
pollutants in the border region, as well as GHG emissions.
Projects run the gamut from ambient air monitoring to
retrofitting school buses, to requiring use of ultra-low sulfur
diesel fuel in freight trucks operating in the border region, to
testing emissions from vehicles idling at border crossings.
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-42 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
recommends that the EPA expand its
research on international transport and
atmospheric deposition, including
research on the effects of atmospheric
deposition on the food chain of Tribal
subsistence foods and treaty-reserved
lands.
On the Canadian border, ambient monitoring is in place and
real-time data is available in both countries. Transport of air
pollutants is studied and monitored as well. Atmospheric
deposition monitoring and modeling has been extensive in the
U.S.-Canada border area and further afield in both countries.
Regarding effects of deposition on the food chain of tribal
subsistence foods and treaty-reserved lands, we will work with
our researchers to examine current data and explore
possibilities of additional research that may be needed to fill in
data gaps.
6. The Healthier Outdoor Air Chapter,
Tribal Air Quality Management Section
should better define how the HQ and
regions will provide support to the
tribes. There is a statement on page 32
that the allocation of tribal grant funds
will be addressed later. However, the
$266k increase in tribal grant funds
shown on Table 2 on page 31 will not
address all of the grant support areas
listed on pages 42 and 43 or be
adequate to support the tribal activities
listed on pages 43 and 44. In addition,
EPA regions are limited in the amount
of staff and other technical resources
available to assist tribes.
Region 6
The referenced increase is in the President's budget, but is
dependant on the budget process. We will not know if that
funding will become available until a budget is passed by the
Congress and signed by the President. Should the additional
funding become available, the annual tribal STAG allocation
will be used to allocate that funding to each Regional Office
based on existing allocation factors. Regional Offices are
expected to work with available funding and prioritize grant
requests in accordance with existing policies, including the
2005 Criteria for Providing Funds to Tribes from the State and
Tribal Assistance Grant Appropriation for 103 and 105 Grants.
None required.
Issue Area: Appendix A - Performance Measures
1. NAAQS - We recommend an
additional Regional Performance
Measure to address the NAAQS
Region 6
Appendix A iThe National Program Office (OAQPS) discussed the concept
lof adding additional performance measures with the
(appropriate sublead regional office. Both the NPM and the
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-43 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
sublead region decided against adding these additional
measures this year.
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
infrastructure requirements for the 1997
ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS found in
Clean Air Act 110(a)(2). The
performance measure could be:
Number of actions to address CAA
110(a)(2) certification letters for the
1997 Ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS
referenced in our Findings Notices of
2008 (March 27, 2008 and October 22,
2008 Federal Register notices). The
National Target could be the "Sum of
Bids."
2. NAAQS - We recommend a
performance measure for the Lead
NAAQS 110(a)(2) submittals (due
October 15, 2011). The performance
measure could be: Number of State and
Local Agency submittals to address
CAA section 110(a)(2) for the 2008
Lead NAAQS promulgated October 15,
2008. The national target would be
"Sum of Bids."
Region 6
Appendix A
The National Program Office (OAQPS) discussed the concept
of adding additional performance measures with the
appropriate sublead regional office. Both the NPM and the
sublead region decided against adding these additional
measures this year.
None required.
3. OAQPS P06 and P21. EPA Region
6 will most likely commit to one or the
other of these two measures. Regions
should have the option of doing one of
these measures in lieu of the other, or
doing a very scaled down Title V
program audit that focuses on fees
while committing to some percentage
of Title V permit renewal review.
Region 6
Appendix A
OAQPS worked in consultation with the Regions to develop
these measures. We believe that these measures are essential
for ensuring oversight of state permitting activities.
None required.
4. Regarding measure OAP 1 if HQ
Region 5
Appendix A
HQ calculates regional results, and includes these results in
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H - 44 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
has the data, why doesn't it enter the
results into ACS directly instead of
giving the data to the regions to enter?
This is inefficient.
broader, quarterly program reports that are provided to
regional program managers. Regional managers use the
information in these reports to assess and report their
performance within the regions, and to report into ACS.
5. For OAR's climate protection
priority, there are only operational
measures for the voluntary climate
programs. There are no operational
measures for Regional Administrators'
priorities.
OCFO
OAR does not manage or conduct oversight on priorities
established by Regional Administrators.
None required.
Issue Area: Appendix B - Effective Use and Distribution of STAG Funds
1. On Page 2 under Improving Work
Plans and Measurement of Performance
for Grants, EPA proposes to convene a
work group to develop a menu of work
plan formats. The Southeastern
agencies would appreciate the
opportunity to be involved in this work
group through participation by a staff
person from one of the member
agencies or a Metro/SESARM staff
person.
Metro 4, Inc. and
Southeastern
States Air
Resource
Managers, Inc.
p. 2
EPA's Office of Grants and Debarment has set up an Agency-
wide workgroup in cooperation with the representatives of the
environmental commissioners of states. OAR will inquire
about avenues for other state/local input.
None required.
2. Under Approval Process for STAG
Awards to Co-Regulator Organizations,
EPA states that MJOs are subject to
determinations that they can be
exempted from competition. We
believe that Metro 4 and SESARM
qualify for exemption under Paragraph
6. c. (6) and exception under
Paragraphs 12. a. (2), (4), and (6) of the
Metro 4, Inc. and
Southeastern
States Air
Resource
Managers, Inc.
p. 3-4
The Agency has found that multi-jurisdictional organizations
have been very successful in utilizing the public interest
exception to competition. That said, the Agency did commit
to reexamining the policy and its applicability to MJO
operations as extensions of state, local and tribal
responsibilities using STAG funds. The Agency is currently
consulting internally and with stakeholders and expects to
update its approach during FY 2011.
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H - 45 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
competition policy. We do not object
to the public interest exception being
used as long as it is implemented via an
efficient and effective process. The
sole purpose of Metro 4 and SESARM
is to serve the collective needs of the
local and state agencies in the Southeast
when it is not practical or possible for
each of them to meet their individual or
collective needs by themselves. This
certainly is a public interest benefit of
our existence. We continue to
encourage EPA to find a less rigorous
and less resource-intensive way to
award grant funds to MJOs when those
funds are derived from STAG accounts
at the direction of the agencies
comprising the MJOs.
3. The last paragraph on Page 4 deals
with the Preliminary Allocation for
State/Local Continuing Air Program
Grants. EPA notes that it has not yet
developed a preliminary allocation
concept for review. For several years,
EPA has been working on a new
allocation formula. The process was
designed ultimately to be applied to the
distribution of all Section 105 STAG
grant funding from EPA to the local
and state agencies in the respective
regions. We understand that the
formula is currently under further
review, given the new funding that has
Metro 4, Inc. and
Southeastern
States Air
Resource
Managers, Inc.
p. 4
An EPA Workgroup composed of both regional and program
office representatives worked diligently over a 2-year period
to produce a revised methodology that aligned resources
consistent with the considerations outlined in the CAA—
population affected, severity and extent of the AQ problems,
and financial need. The Workgroup also developed principles
to help guide the development and implementation of a
methodology. EPA has now developed an allocation scheme
which it believes applies the principles to the methodology in
a manner that directs resources both equitably and strategically
across the country. The approach also reflects the valuable
input EPA received from state and local agencies and multi-
jurisdictional organizations during its development and which
the Agency hopes will continue during the implementation of
the approach over time.
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-46 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
been proposed. Since 2005, Metro 4
and SESARM have been advocating
adjustments to the formula and we have
gone on record supporting a reasonable
phase -in period. We encourage EPA to
implement a new allocation approach in
FFY 2011 and in future years, along
with the equity adjustment suggested in
Comment 11. EPA's review suggests
that Region 4 agencies qualify for
approximately $5 million in additional
funds based on a comprehensive
evaluation of workload factors. This
funding deficiency needs to be rectified
in the coming year and all future years.
4. HQ may want to ask each of the
regional program offices what
workplan elements they are using with
their states to develop consistent
program work plans. We request that
our states include in their State
Continuing Program Work Plans
workplan program elements that are
derived from the National Program
Guidance.
5. Typo: "To further improve ... a
State/EPA workgroup of grant
practioners ..." should be
"practitioners."
6. Region 5 is concerned about the
statement that "Radon grants to tribes
and intertribal consortia under TSCA
Commenter (s)
Region 5
Region 5
Region 5
Location in
Draft
Guidance
p. 2
p. 2, last
paragraph
p. 4
NPM Response
OAR expects this topic to be addressed as part of an Agency-
wide workgroup effort with ECOS to improve and standardize
workplans that co-implementors submit for categorical grants
and for PPGs. OAR has worked to assure that regional air
program interests are adequately represented on this group.
Agree.
Grants for radon projects (STAG/SIRG) funded under TSCA
10, including those to Ttribes, are subject to EPA's
competition policy (EPA Order 5700. 5A1) and must be
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
None required.
Corrected.
No change.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H - 47 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
§10 grants must be competed."
Although this program has been
formally competed previously in some
regions, including Region 5, we have
recently begun to do a "quasi-
competition" rather than the full
competition to be more efficient and
because our region believes it is
important to maintain the flexibility to
tailor our approach as specific future
circumstances warrant. Last year we
notified tribes of funding and awarded
grants without using formal
competition. If the exemption is
removed and competition is required,
Region 5 is concerned that it may not
be as efficient, particularly if the
funding decreases. Competition would
require that the Request for Proposals
be completed by November in order to
meet the extended review process
required for these particular grants, but
it would be difficult to do an RFP in
November since we don't know our
funding level at that point in the fiscal
year.
Alternatively, we could issue grants
under §306, since those grants don't
requirement completion; however, §306
would require a match (which is not
required under §10). Tribal matching
funds could be a barrier to most tribes.
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
competed. Even if radon grants are made available only to
tribes, any TSCA 10 grants must be competed. Because tribes
are not the only eligible entities under TSCA 10, limiting the
competition to tribes requires Grants Competition Advocate
(GCA) approval. There is no exemption from competition for
TSCA 10 grants to tribes nor has there ever been such an
exemption.
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-48 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
Commenter (s)
Location in I
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
Issue Area: Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring
1. National Association of Clean Air
Agencies applauds EPA's request for
an additional $15 million in FY 2011
Section 103 funds for the purchase of
new monitoring equipment, which will
greatly enhance the ability of state and
local agencies to implement new
monitoring requirements for lead,
nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and ozone.
However, the association is concerned
that the requested $15 million falls far
short of the funding needed for new
monitoring equipment over the next
few years. As of March 2010, new and
proposed changes to the monitoring
networks for NO2, lead, ozone, and
sulfur dioxide (SO2) would require
hundreds of new monitors beginning in
2011,2012, and 2013. Proposed
revisions to the carbon monoxide (CO)
and fine particulate (PM2.5) monitoring
networks are expected by the end of
this year.
National
Association of
Clean Air
Agencies
Appendix C
EPA will work closely with our partners on the allocation of
funds for FY11. We will use our statutory authority as
appropriate to provide funding for the new and/or revised
monitoring networks.
None required.
2. As state and local agencies prepare
to implement new monitoring
requirements, National Association of
Clean Air Agencies recommends that
EPA work together with state and local
agencies to develop a method for
prioritizing new monitoring equipment
purchases and implementation over the
National
Association of
Clean Air
Agencies
Appendix C
EPA will work closely with our partners on the allocation of
funds for FY11. We will use our statutory authority as
appropriate to provide funding for the new and/or revised
monitoring networks.
EPA does plan to update the National Monitoring Strategy to
reflect the changes to the monitoring network.
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-49 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
next several years. It may be necessary
to develop a program for phasing in and
funding new monitoring sites, including
the expansion of the lead monitoring
network in FY 2011. National
Association of Clean Air Agencies
further recommends updating the
National Monitoring Strategy to reflect
changes in the monitoring network,
include sustainable funding strategies,
and address issues such as the
importance of special field programs
and monitoring to evaluate
environmental successes (as
recommended by the National Resource
Council in its 2004 report, "Air Quality
Management in the U.S."). National
Association of Clean Air Agencies also
suggests allowing state and local
agencies the flexibility to use some of
the $15 million for operating the
monitors, rather than new-equipment
purchases only, if that makes the most
sense in their circumstances. Such
decisions would be determined by the
state or local agency and the regional
office. The association looks forward
to working with EPA to fully develop
funding allocation plans for monitoring
networks. This includes identifying
opportunities for disinvesting in current
monitoring activities, along with
providing realistic estimates of the
associated cost savings.
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-50 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
3 . Collaboration regarding sustainable
funding strategies should include
proposed funding for photochemical
assessment monitoring stations
(PAMS), Interagency Monitoring of
Protected Visual Environments
(IMPROVE) sites and quality
assurance. EPA is proposing to reserve
5 percent of FY 201 1 PAMS funds for
the purchase of new capital equipment,
use $3.8 million of FY 201 1 funding
for visibility monitoring at IMPROVE
and Clean Air Status and Trends
Network (CASTNET) sites, and
allocate nearly $3 million in FY 2011
funds for quality assurance programs,
including the Performance Evaluation
Program (PEP) and National
Performance Audit Program (NPAP).
While National Association of Clean
Air Agencies generally supports these
efforts, the association encourages EPA
to work with state and local agencies to
discuss the ongoing implementation
and future needs of these programs
before allocating specific funds.
4. EPA is also proposing to transition
funding for the PM2.5 monitoring
network from Section 103 to Section
105, which requires matching funds
from state and local agencies, over four
years beginning in FY 201 1 . National
Association of Clean Air Agencies does
Commenter (s)
National
Association of
Clean Air
Agencies
National
Association of
Clean Air
Agencies
Location in
Draft
Guidance
Appendix C
Appendix C
NPM Response
EPA will work closely with our partners on the allocation of
funds for FY11.
EPA will work closely with NACAA on a transition plan for
the PM2.5 funding from Section 103 to Section 105 authority.
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
None required.
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H -51 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
not oppose this transition. However, in
order to allow state and local agencies
adequate time to make the necessary
adjustments to their budgets and
programs, particularly given the current
challenges regarding state resources
and the implementation of new
monitoring requirements, National
Association of Clean Air Agencies
recommends that EPA shift funding
from Section 103 gradually.
Specifically, the association suggests
that funding be transitioned from
Section 103 on the following schedule:
10 percent in FY 201 1; 20 percent in
FY 2012; 40 percent in FY 2013; and
60 percent in FY 2014, before the final
shift to 100 percent funding under
Section 105 beginning in FY 2015. It is
vital that funding levels not be
decreased throughout the transition or
thereafter.
5. Finally, National Association of
Clean Air Agencies encourages EPA's
continued support for "hot-spot"
community-scale air toxics monitoring.
The association looks forward to
working with EPA to meet the goals in
the National Monitoring Strategy and
continue to evaluate the expansion of
the air toxics monitoring program.
6. This comment is related to the
Commenter (s)
National
Association of
Clean Air
Agencies
Metro/SESARM
Location in
Draft
Guidance
Appendix C
p. 4
NPM Response
EPA intends to resume a grant competition for Community-
Scale Air Toxics Monitoring Projects, which will be expanded
to also include additional school monitoring projects.
EPA will work closely with our partners on the allocation of
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
None required.
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-52 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
section on Highlights of Changes in
Monitoring Funding for FFY 2011. We
acknowledge and appreciate the fact
that EPA has requested $15 million to
help fund additional air monitoring
equipment. However, we understand
that $15 million may not even pay for
the purchases of monitors for the single
most expensive parameter for which
expanded monitoring is required. As
we stated earlier in Comment 13, we
encourage EPA to identify $15 million
in additional funding to support this
financial burden that is being placed on
the agencies and that EPA identify
additional funding in FFY 2012 that
can be used for monitor purchases that
do not have to occur in FFY 2011.
7. This comment is related to the
section on Highlights of Changes in
Monitoring Funding for FFY 2011.
EPA indicates that it is planning to
initiate a 4-year transition period for
changing PM2.5 monitoring from
Section 103 to 105. We have noted
earlier in Comments 13 and 24 that
there are major financial complications
to the costs of purchasing, operating,
and maintaining newly required
monitoring equipment. Section 103
funding provides the best opportunity to
maintain current monitoring equipment
and purchase and deploy new
Commenter (s)
Metro/SESARM
Location in
Draft
Guidance
p. 4
NPM Response
funds for FY1 1 . We will use our statutory authority as
appropriate to provide funding for the new and/or revised
monitoring networks.
EPA will work closely with our partners on the allocation of
funds for FY1 1 . We will use our statutory authority as
appropriate to provide funding for the new and/or revised
monitoring networks.
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-53 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
equipment. It may be impossible for
some agencies to meet existing
monitoring obligations and also
purchase and provide support for new
equipment under the funding
approaches that EPA is suggesting in
this guidance. We encourage EPA to
retain its existing process of awarding
PM2.5 monitoring funds under Section
103.
8 . "For FY 20 1 1 , EPA has requested
an additional $15 million in STAG
resources to help fund additional
monitoring required as a result of
revising the NAAQS for lead, NO2,
and ozone. EPA intends to use the $15
million for purchasing monitoring
equipment using the section 103
authority of the CAA. Beginning in FY
201 1, and through FY 2014, EPA
proposes to transition the funding
authority for PM2.5 monitoring from
section 103 to 105."
Comment: The monitoring costs for
the new standards will include new
shelters as well and construction and
start-up costs. The funding for the new
networks should be flexible such that
any funds dedicated to the new
monitoring network(s) should be used
initially for acquisition, implementation
and start-up with ability to transition
Commenter (s)
Virginia
Department of
Environmental
Quality
Location in
Draft
Guidance
p. 4
NPM Response
The $15 million targeted for new equipment is intended to
cover monitors and the establishment of monitoring sites, to
include shelters and associated construction/installation.
We will work closely with our partners on the FY1 1 allocation
of funds and will use our statutory authority as appropriate.
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H - 54 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
the funds to 105 matching program as
initial start-up needs are met. PM2.5
can transition this way as well as long
as EPA recognizes that the 103 funding
for PM2.5 should be transitioned in its
entirety and not leveraged with the
matching funds.
9. "For FY 201 1, EPA proposes to
utilize $150,000 prorated from each
PAMS recipient, to perform regional
and national scale assessments of the
network and of the data."
Comment: The PAMS program is
highly resource-intensive requiring
expensive instrumentation and
analytical expenditures. Taking this
money from the PAMS program for
each site seems excessive for an effort
that already has a draft document
completed.
10. "While EPA anticipates continued
support for the characterization of air
toxics hotspots at the community level
in FY 201 1, EPA intends to further
consult with stakeholders on the nature
and approach for such support. The
Agency will produce supplementary
information and guidance for FY
2011."
Comment: It is unclear as to the nature
Commenter (s)
Virginia
Department of
Environmental
Quality
Virginia
Department of
Environmental
Quality
Location in
Draft
Guidance
p. 6
p. 19
NPM Response
This paragraph was not written clearly. The total amount to be
held back to perform the regional and national scale
assessment of the network and of the data is $150,000.
EPA intends to resume the Community-Scale Air Toxics
Monitoring Program in FY1 1 . The request for grant proposals
will clearly identify the requirements and expectations for
objectives and eligibility, including risk screening, risk
characterization, and/or risk assessment.
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
Paragraph
rewritten.
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H - 55 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
and extent of this support. Previous
years have seen EPA use the
community based funding as a source
for other unrelated programs. In
defining the nature and approach to
community air toxics EPA should
include clear definition of the
expectations from such projects, the
efficacy of Risk Assessment as a tool in
the evaluation of the results and
Stakeholder techniques that will engage
and inform the public.
11. OAQPS and OAR should include
the EPA regions in the process and
logistics of the transition from Section
103 to 105 authority.
Region 5
p. 9, last
paragraph
This is a topic that will be addressed as part of the joint EPA-
NACAA follow-up and regions are included as part of this
effort.
None required.
Issue Area: Appendix D - OAR 2010 Priorities
1. The second bullet under Reduce
GHG Emissions from Major Sources
mentions completion of the tailoring
rule and issuance of guidance. EPA
does not have the authority to
unilaterally change federally-approved
SIPs. Even if EPA successfully
concludes development of the tailoring
rule, the revised GHG thresholds for
PSD and Title V purposes will only be
effective at the federal level relative to
many states. In jurisdictions with
federally-approved PSD and Title V
programs, the lower permitting
thresholds will remain effective in
Metro 4, Inc. and
Southeastern
States Air
Resource
Managers, Inc.
p. 1
EPA received numerous comments on these issues in the
tailoring rule proposal. EPA will be addressing these
comments in our final tailoring rule, which is expected to be
finalized in May. EPA will also continue to work with its
regulatory partners through the grant process to ensure a
smooth transition to this new work.
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-56 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
applicable rules until the agencies
complete rulemaking to reflect the new
GHG thresholds. We are also
concerned about the legal vulnerability
of the tailoring rule proposal. If
someone successfully challenges the
rule, our agencies will find themselves
under a deluge of permitting obligations
for which no agency can adequately
prepare. We suggest that EPA provide
an adequate approach and timeframe
for implementation of these new
requirements to ensure that our
agencies have time to prepare for this
complex new work.
EPA will develop timely guidance and training for permitting
authorities.
2. The first bullet mentions providing
needed and timely guidance. We
concur and encourage delivery of such
guidance at the earliest possible
moment. We believe that guidance
should accompany new rules and
programs so that the full scope of
proposals can be examined during the
comment periods.
Metro 4, Inc. and
Southeastern
States Air
Resource
Managers, Inc.
p. 5
None required.
3. The second bullet references
improving processes and reducing
administrative burdens. We concur
with EPA's desire to improve the
process and reduce administrative
burdens. Our agencies are currently
facilitating the identification of such
problems and improvements. We
Metro 4, Inc. and
Southeastern
States Air
Resource
Managers, Inc.
p. 5
EPA does not intend to employ the LEAN analysis of each
state program. Rather, EPA participated in a voluntary LEAN
analysis with several states. EPA intends to use findings from
the analysis to look for efficiencies in SIP processing, which is
a federal process. EPA is also looking at a wide variety of
other options that may lead to improvements in state and
federal processes. We will work with states in incorporating
any changes to SIP development and processing.
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H - 57 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
support the LEAN approach to a
degree, but it does not solve all of the
problems. As we understand it, LEAN
looks at existing processes and how
they can be streamlined. We believe
that many processes need to be
reengineered, replaced, or simply
eliminated. We suggest that EPA
should use its knowledge of what is
needed from an air quality standpoint,
consider the realistic resource
limitations that our agencies are
experiencing, place efficiency and
effectiveness at the top of the priority
list, engage its partner local and state
agencies in redesigning the SIP process,
and proceed toward implementation as
soon as practicable. We do not believe
it is appropriate or necessary for EPA to
come into our agencies and do a LEAN
analysis of individual programs. That
should be left to our agencies to do if
necessary. EPA may employ LEAN,
along with other important
considerations, as it evaluates its
federal programs, subject to the caution
that more than refinement (in fact,
redesign) of existing processes may be
necessary to resolve existing
deficiencies in the federal system.
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
Issue Area: Other
1 . This is at least the second year that
Region 4
iThe national guidance will include a preliminary allocation for
None required.
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-58 of 59
-------
Appendix H - Revision A
Comment from regions, state,
tribe, or other stakeholder
the allocation to the Regions has not
been in the draft guidance. This
allocation is desperately needed in the
April time frame as Regions start
meeting with their state/local agencies
in April and May to discuss the
upcoming grant workplan for the next
FY. It is critical that the new funds be
allocated based on workload rather than
the typical pro rata. This provides an
excellent opportunity to allocate the
funds consistent with the methodology
developed by the internal EPA
workgroup. Decisions need to be
determined sooner than later to give
time for the Regions to work with their
state/local agencies to implement any
revised allocation as the Region must
take the Regional allocation and work
with its partners to devise a state
allocation which factors in local and
regional priorities and issues.
Commenter (s)
Location in
Draft
Guidance
NPM Response
the bulk of state and local air grants being requested by the
Agency. Some small areas will still require further discussion
with stakeholders. Discussions are still being held regarding
the distribution of $15 million for ambient monitoring related
to new NAAQS requirements as well as for the distribution of
$25 million for increasing permitting capacity for greenhouse
gases. These allocations are expected within several months.
Action Taken
in Final
Guidance
++ End ++
Final Guidance May 13, 2010
Appendix H-59 of 59
------- |